AllThingsAusPol

Auspollin' errday.

[allthingsauspol]

Take note, Victorian Labor

 Just yesterday, Federal Leader of the Opposition Bill Shorten, at the NSW State Labor Conference, labelled members of the government  “backward”, “arrogant” and “out of touch”. And furthermore, he declared “Labor still has work to do”.

  Now, such a statement couldn’t be more relevant to Victorian Labor and its leader Daniel Andrews.

  The dictaphone scandal that came to light last week will no doubt damage Labor’s prospects in the November State election. What looked to be a shoo-in for Labor may now not be so. The extent of the political damage to Labor is yet to be determined, but you can be sure there will be some.

  Andrews has this morning described the situation as a “dirty mess”, and asserted that he is “not thrilled” with the circumstances. I bet he’s not.

Assistant Secretary Kosmos Samaras of Labor has taken responsibility as the catalyst for the whole affair. He claims he only listened to the contents of the tape in order to determine its owner. He has admitted fault for his actions of destroying the recording, but remains adamant that neither he, nor his colleagues he consulted, are responsible for distributing the recording. In fact, he claims that his main rationale for destroying the tape was “to end any possibility that a recording be disseminated”. Mr Andrews concurs, claiming he does not know how the contents of the tape were released, and that “he wish he knew”. Furthermore, he doesn’t accept that the leak has come from the Labor Party office.

  Andrews and his party now risk appearing exactly how his Federal counterpart described his own foes – as out of touch, and arrogant in their attempts to brush over the situation and evade the public. Such a situation, as with any scandal, diverts attention from Labor’s strong policy initiatives on key issues like transport, health and education. The hard work of the party moves into the shadows, and sadly, Labor is left looking dishonest and worthy only of dirty tactics.

  If Labor wants any chance of recovery before the election, they must deliver answers. Labor must claim responsibility, as they have this morning, and remain committed to resolving the affair. They failed to answer questions on the weekend, which doesn’t exactly scream honesty. But if Labor can now remain forthcoming with information, and determine exactly how the recording was leaked, this may provide a partial shield from electoral damage. And if the leak has in fact come from within the Victorian ALP, there needs to be full disclosure if they want any hope of cleaning up this “mess”.

   Victorian Labor – you certainly have work to do now. 

[allthingsauspol]

Roasting Lambie

Earlier this week we saw PUP Senator from Tasmania Jacqui Lambie make some ‘interesting’ comments on breakfast radio.  The crux of these was that she wanted a man with money, “a package between their legs”, and that in fact the male in question didn’t even need to speak! (Ladies – amirite?!)

But in all seriousness, things were said, people got offended, and most will get over it. But what is really so offensive about her comments?

Sure, it’s breakfast time. Not the most appropriate time for such discussion. We don’t really need to hear about big dicks over Weet-bix, gettin’ the ‘D’ over tea, third legs over our bacon and eggs … I digress.

  It firstly needs to be acknowledged that IT WAS A JOKE.  Being new to the media spotlight, stuff ups of some kind could be expected. Her response was both inappropriate and unnecessary at times, as she has acknowledged.

  But perhaps people were offended by more than just the crude aspect of the statements. Could it be that this honesty from Lambie is perceived as offensive because it goes against every female gender stereotype about relationships and marriage? Instead of spouting about living married life happily ever after with kids in the suburbs, Ms. Lambie was sharing her experience as a single woman in her 40’s. And, yes, most of what she said was inappropriate speaking in her position as an elected official. But, it should certainly be recognised that these statements contrast so strongly with what is expected of a woman approaching middle age. And not everyone is comfortable with women breaking this mould.

  Many reacted to her comments by pointing out what the public response would have been had similar comments been uttered by a male politician. Brett Whiteley, Federal Member for Braddon in Tasmania, asserts that “I can only imagine the public outrage if a male member of parliament…had participated in a similar interview and referred to the opposite sex in such a way”.

If this is in fact true, then I think it is rightly so. I think that it would and should attract significant disapproval from both parliament and the public at large. However, I think that a lot of people (read: men, especially our Prime Minister) would also be tempted to put such comments, coming from a man, on the ‘boys will be boys’ pile. That all hell would not have broken loose, as predicted by Whiteley. That once again, men’s carnal desires are treated completely naturally and have excuses made for them. While in the opposite corner, women’s must be concealed at all costs, or they risk being labelled any number of derogatory terms.

  Finally, let’s journey back for a moment and look at the catalyst for these remarks. Ms Lambie, a member of the Australian Parliament, was being quizzed on the status of her hair removal regime, her love life and then involved in some attempt to shack her up with a radio listener. In response to MP Whiteley’s claim, I don’t believe that any male politician would have participated in such an interview. I believe most of the questions asked of Ms Lambie simply would not have been asked of a male counterpart, at least not in the same tone. Those questions were asked of her primarily because she is a woman, in later part of her life, and she is not married. I am still yet to see the day where I hear a male senator on the radio discussing his preferences on ‘man-scaping’, or being pushed to explain why he has not been in a relationship for 11 years.

  But hey, on the face of it, I did have a laugh. And that’s how it was intended.

Furthermore, Jacqui Lambie has since apologised for her comments. I’m sure those who weren’t laughing are now satisfied.

[allthingsauspol]

Eulogy for QT

How I miss my good old question time,

Wherefore art thou quality divine?

Instead of a forum of debate and fact,

You're filled with pollies lacking tact.

I sit and watch as my anger rises,

Personal attacks are no surprises.

This isn't just from Government,

The Opposition's hardly heaven sent!

Then there's the issue of the Speaker,

Impartiality? Never seen it weaker!

At least if there was flair and wit,

I wouldn't have to lose my shit!

It makes me pine for days of Keating,

Lettuce flogging was his form of beating.

Even Howard was cunning, showed no mercy,

Led for 11 years, caused controversy.

Gillard's lawyer past served her well,

Told misogynists to go to hell!

But now we are left with this pathetic excuse,

Accountability subject to abuse.

Government dodging questions blunt,

Allegedly called their rival a cunt.

The Opposition tries to challenge but fails,

Withdraw their questions, they are of no avail.

Any real effort to prod the Coalition,

Turns out to be a fruitless mission.

As all it takes to remove the heat?

Tell the member to resume their seat...