The laughter continues at Abbott's attempt to turn back the clock by reintroducing knights and dames

Editor David Moase in The Daily Examiner, 27 March 2013, Page 11:

If there was one headline I didn't expect to see this week, it was the news Australia will soon have knights and dames in our Order of Australia honours.

It is a staggering decision by the Prime Minister - not a jump to the left or a step to the right but he's definitely doing the time warp.

Was there something particularly wrong with the Order of Australia that needed this extra level of honours using titles we ditched 20 years ago?

Are governors-general or other members of society really in need of an old-fashioned title in front of their name?

But who am I to argue with the PM, so without further ado I'd like to release the first round of honours in the Order of the Opinion Page*.

Firstly, for his long-running and unstinting support of conservative politics, enthusiastic mocking of anything on the political left and battling against the chainsaw-stopping efforts of Greenies and global warming advocates ... arise Sir Fred Perring, of Halfway Creek.

In the interests of bipartisanship, the second honour goes to a man who has been a longstanding foot soldier in the class warfare of the Valley, whose efforts in support of Labor are undiminished and is a champion of the battlers around Maclean ... arise Sir Bruce Apps, of Townsend.

And finally, for hours spent reading Hansard, commitment to fully attributing references in her letters and for holding the council and the conservatives'  feet to the fire ... arise Dame Judith M Melville, of Yamba.

*Due to budgetary constraints, all awards of the Order are strictly honorary.

When a website tells the unvarnished truth.....

This is an image of Prime Minister Tony Abbott, on his feet during Question Time, which was displayed on the Australian Parliament website on 24 March 2014:

Quote of the Week

People do have a right to be bigots, you know. In a free country, people do have rights to say things that other people find offensive, insulting or bigoted.

[Australian Attorney-General Senator George Brandis on his feet in the Senate, Hansard 24 March 2014]

A Northern Rivers' water authority does not want Metgasco & Dart gas exploration in areas it intends to source future water supplies

Echo NetDaily 25 March 2014:

Rous Water has called on the state government to prevent gas exploration in areas it is planning to explore for underground water sources.

The county council, which supplies Lismore, Ballina, Richmond Valley and Byron LGAs, has identified subterranean water in its future water strategy as the best and most cost-effective source to meet its increased needs in the coming decades.

But the recent pollution of aquifers in the Pilliga by Santos mining with uranium and a number of heavy metals has triggered serious concerns among the board at the prospect of something similar happening in the northern rivers.

At its most recent board meeting Rous Water unanimously passed a motion that the NSW government and all the relevant state members of parliament be informed of the specific areas Rous Water has identified as potential future water sources for region.

‘The motion requested that the government not approve any exploratory or production gas wells in the vicinity of those areas under investigation until such time as Rous Water’s future water strategy is fully determined,’ said one board member, Lismore councillor Simon Clough.

There are two petroleum exploration licences (PELs) – 16 (Metgasco) and 445 (Dart) – where drilling activity could adversely affect Rous’s future water strategy…

Read rest of article here.

On 19 February 2014 the National Archives of Australia and Dept. of Immigration and Border Protection decided to limit information about Anthony John Abbott

While Anthony John Abbott was Federal Leader of the Opposition the National Archives of Australia displayed on its website a digital record of Richard and Fay Abbott’s application for assisted passage to Australia with their first two children, Anthony and Jane.

Sometime after Anthony John ‘Tony’ Abbott became prime minister this digital copy disappeared from view in the original record which still retains its "open" listing.

Now a restricted listing for “Anthony John Abbott” have been posted online by archive staff and, one has to pay $29.90 for a paper copy of an unspecified record pertaining to this person if access is granted.

Snapshot taken on 22 March 2014

http://recordsearch.naa.gov.au/NameSearch/Interface/ItemDetail.aspx?Barcode=13147273

The reason given for this apparent desire not to have information on the Prime Minister and his family as freely available to the general public as is the information on other living persons or their parents and grandparents is that: Information or matter the disclosure of which under this Act would involve the unreasonable disclosure of information relating to the personal affairs of any person (including a deceased person).

So it is perfectly acceptable to release the digital records of others and, therefore for the general public to know how many times former Prime Minister John Howard's father was absent without leave when on active duty in France during World War One or how many times many other ordinary servicemen caught a venereal disease or went before courts-martial during both world wars.

It is also acceptable for what sometimes amounts to idle gossip or vindictive accusation about ordinary Australians from as late as the 1950s, 60s and 70s (concerning treason/sedition or membership of the Communist Party) to be digitally available on the National Archives website, as well as copies of ASIO surveillance photographs of May Day marchers and Moratorium protesters, yet Prime Minister Abbott's history is to be hidden from general view. 

One can be forgiven for thinking that there is now one rule for the Prime Minister and another for the rest of Australia.

The real reason Anthony John 'Tony' Abbott waited until he was almost 24 years old to become an Australian citizen?

When Anthony John Abbott was born to an English father and a first-generation Australian mother at a general lying-in hospital in York Road, Lambeth, London, on 4 November 1957, his parents did not register him as an Australian infant born overseas or immediately apply for Australian citizenship on his behalf.

Presumably because at that time Richard and Fay Abbott thought they would be permanently living in England and raising a family there.

He therefore had only one official nationality status – as a British subject and citizen.

In fact it was not until over twenty years after the family had arrived in Australia as subsidised assisted migrants that Tony Abbott’s parents applied to register his birth with the Dept. of Immigration and Ethnic Affairs and apply for his citizenship, in a document/s dated 19 June 1981.

This application appears to have been treated as urgent by departmental staff.

His parents were subsequently informed in a letter dated 1 July 1981 that Anthony John Abbott was now deemed to be an Australian citizen under Section 11 of the Australian Citizenship Act 1948 which allowed citizenship by descent.

At this time Tony Abbott was 23 years and 7 months of age and, had either applied for a Rhodes Scholarship or was intending to apply for this scholarship to study at Oxford University in the United Kingdom.

Currently such applications must be applied for after 1 June in the year a Rhodes Scholarship is on offer.

To gain a Rhodes Scholarship an applicant has to be an Australian citizen and have been resident in Australia for at least five of the last ten years.

Tony Abbott was apparently intending to depart Australia on or about 10 July 1981 and, started his scholarship course at Queens College, Oxford, in October 1981.

One cannot escape the suspicion that the future Prime Minister of Australia only applied for Australian citizenship at that time in order to gain a monetary advantage which would allow him to further his studies overseas.

Which, if true, would make him a somewhat reluctant Aussie and perhaps go some way to explaining his strong admiration of the British monarchy and those anachronistic English titles he has re-introduced (without consultation with Cabinet or party room) into the Australian honours system.

Note: Immigration and citizenship information found at the National Archives of Australia.

UPDATE

There is no National Archives record listed of Fay Abbott applying to register the overseas birth of Tony Abbott’s sister, Jane Elizabeth Abbott (born on 25 January 1959 at Hammersmith, London U.K.) either in 1981 or any other year.

In June 1981 Jane Abbott would have been 22 years of age.

Abbott Government's get-out-of-gaol-free card for closet and open racists

Australian Attorney-General George Brandis’ announcement of his intention to weaken the Commonwealth Racial Discrimination Act 1975:

Racial Discrimination Act

25 March 2014

The Government Party Room this morning approved reforms to the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (the Act), which will strengthen the Act’s protections against racism, while at the same time removing provisions which unreasonably limit freedom of speech.

The legislation will repeal section 18C of the Act, as well as sections 18B, 18D, and 18E.

A new section will be inserted into the Act which will preserve the existing protection against intimidation and create a new protection from racial vilification.  This will be the first time that racial vilification is proscribed in Commonwealth legislation sending a clear message that it is unacceptable in the Australian community.

I have always said that freedom of speech and the need to protect people from racial vilification are not inconsistent objectives. Laws which are designed to prohibit racial vilification should not be used as a vehicle to attack legitimate freedoms of speech.

This is an important reform and a key part of the Government’s freedom agenda. It sends a strong message about the kind of society that we want to live in where freedom of speech is able to flourish and racial vilification and intimidation are not tolerated.

The draft amendments are released for community consultation.  The Government is interested in hearing from all stakeholders on the proposed reforms.  Submissions can be made until 30 April 2014 at s18cconsultation@ag.gov.au.

A copy of the draft amendments is attached.

Section of the existing Racial Discrimination Act 1975 the Abbott Government is replacing:

Part IIA—Prohibition of offensive behaviour based on racial hatred  

18B  Reason for doing an act

                   If:

                     (a)  an act is done for 2 or more reasons; and

                     (b)  one of the reasons is the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of a person (whether or not it is the dominant reason or a substantial reason for doing the act);

then, for the purposes of this Part, the act is taken to be done because of the person’s race, colour or national or ethnic origin.

18C  Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin

             (1)  It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:

                     (a)  the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and

                     (b)  the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

Note:          Subsection (1) makes certain acts unlawful. Section 46P of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986allows people to make complaints to the Australian Human Rights Commission about unlawful acts. However, an unlawful act is not necessarily a criminal offence. Section 26 says that this Act does not make it an offence to do an act that is unlawful because of this Part, unless Part IV expressly says that the act is an offence.

             (2)  For the purposes of subsection (1), an act is taken not to be done in private if it:

                     (a)  causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public; or

                     (b)  is done in a public place; or

                     (c)  is done in the sight or hearing of people who are in a public place.

             (3)  In this section:

public place includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, whether express or implied and whether or not a charge is made for admission to the place.

18D  Exemptions

                   Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:

                     (a)  in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or

                     (b)  in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or

                     (c)  in making or publishing:

                              (i)  a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

                             (ii)  a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

18E  Vicarious liability

             (1)  Subject to subsection (2), if:

                     (a)  an employee or agent of a person does an act in connection with his or her duties as an employee or agent; and

                     (b)  the act would be unlawful under this Part if it were done by the person;

this Act applies in relation to the person as if the person had also done the act.

             (2)  Subsection (1) does not apply to an act done by an employee or agent of a person if it is established that the person took all reasonable steps to prevent the employee or agent from doing the act.