Dear Julia

Hi, I'm Sunili, a 20-something lawyer from WA who is lapsed member of the ALP (and former member but, generally, still a supporter of, EMILY's List). I am also an immigrant Australian, who made an affirmation at her admission as an officer of the Supreme Court of Western Australia. A typical lefty, I have strong views about the environment, human rights, and the role of government. I have looked up to Julia Gillard for a long time. Because I didn't want to be disappointed due to miscommunication, I started this blog to write letters to the PM in the lead-up to the 2010 Federal election. The views expressed on this blog are not associated with or endorsed by my employer or any group of which I am a member.

[dearjulia]

Dear @JuliaGillard, have you seen this funny little ditty from Tripod (circa 2008)?

And after Christmas Island last week, and all that 'blood on your hands' business, what do you make of THIS:

Santa Claus took advantage of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s (DIAC) award-winning visa wizard service and knew he could leave it until Christmas Eve to apply for – and obtain – his visa online.

Given Santa’s intention to engage in limited work, of a highly specialised and non-ongoing nature while in Australia, he had previously used the business (short stay) subclass 456 visa. However, the wizard told him he was also eligible to apply online using the eVisitor system.

A DIAC spokesman said today Santa’s visa was approved online instantaneously, given the happiness and economic benefits that had resulted from previous visits and his excellent record of compliance with past visa conditions.

“Perhaps Santa left his visa shopping to the last minute because he’d read about our award-winning initiatives and the ease with which he could apply,” a DIAC spokesman said. “We want to ensure the only red tape in which Santa gets mired is the kind his elves use to tie bows on presents at the North Pole.”

The spokesman said the department’s visa wizard and the citizenship wizard were part of the 21st century online services the department was developing.

“This means faster and better services tailored to the needs of all our clients – not just Santa," the spokesman said. “While it’s widely known how efficiently Santa manages his time, we do recommend he doesn’t leave it quite so late next year.”

DIAC’s online visa and citizenship sites won its second award with a first prize in the business process category at the international FutureGov Government Technology Awards in Bali in 2009. This followed the wizards’ first prize at the prestigious e-Awards for Excellence in e­-Government at the CeBIT international business technology conference in Sydney earlier the same year.

Media Enquiries: National Communications Branch [phone]

It's a joke, right? A hilariously dark, twisted joke set up by a brilliant satirist in the DIAC National Communications Branch to expose the tragic mess that our immigration and visa system has become, right?

Because why else would the Department put out such a media statement when children have died and families who have lost everything have been locked up... why else?

Why?

I hope you have a Happy Christmas -- unlike those who are locked up, alone, and traumatised in detention centres around our great country.

With seasons greetings, Sunili

[dearjulia]

Thank you to @Lizzie_OShea and @Jeff_Sparrow for putting together this excellent letter and the EXCELLENT list of co-signatories.

Dear Prime Minister, We note with concern the increasingly violent rhetoric directed towards Julian Assange of WikiLeaks.

“We should treat Mr Assange the same way as other high-value terrorist targets: Kill him,” writes conservative columnist Jeffrey T Kuhner in the Washington Times. William Kristol, former chief of staff to vice president Dan Quayle, asks, “Why can’t we use our various assets to harass, snatch or neutralize Julian Assange and his collaborators, wherever they are?” “Why isn’t Julian Assange dead?” writes the prominent US pundit Jonah Goldberg. “The CIA should have already killed Julian Assange,” says John Hawkins on the Right Wing News site. Sarah Palin, a likely presidential candidate, compares Assange to an Al Qaeda leader; Rick Santorum, former Pennsylvania senator and potential presidential contender, accuses Assange of “terrorism”. And so on and so forth. Such calls cannot be dismissed as bluster. Over the last decade, we have seen the normalisation of extrajudicial measures once unthinkable, from ‘extraordinary rendition’ (kidnapping) to ‘enhanced interrogation’ (torture). In that context, we now have grave concerns for Mr Assange’s wellbeing. Irrespective of the political controversies surrounding WikiLeaks, Mr Assange remains entitled to conduct his affairs in safety, and to receive procedural fairness in any legal proceedings against him. As is well known, Mr Assange is an Australian citizen. We therefore call upon you to condemn, on behalf of the Australian Government, calls for physical harm to be inflicted upon Mr Assange, and to state publicly that you will ensure Mr Assange receives the rights and protections to which he is entitled, irrespective of whether the unlawful threats against him come from individuals or states. We urge you to confirm publicly Australia’s commitment to freedom of political communication; to refrain from cancelling Mr Assange’s passport, in the absence of clear proof that such a step is warranted; to provide assistance and advocacy to Mr Assange; and do everything in your power to ensure that any legal proceedings taken against him comply fully with the principles of law and procedural fairness. A statement by you to this effect should not be controversial – it is a simple commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law. We believe this case represents something of a watershed, with implications that extend beyond Mr Assange and WikiLeaks. In many parts of the globe, death threats routinely silence those who would publish or disseminate controversial material. If these incitements to violence against Mr Assange, a recipient of Amnesty International’s Media Award, are allowed to stand, a disturbing new precedent will have been established in the English-speaking world. In this crucial time, a strong statement by you and your Government can make an important difference. We look forward to your response. Dr Jeff Sparrow, author and editor  Lizzie O’Shea, Social Justice Lawyer, Maurice Blackburn Professor Noam Chomsky, writer and academic  Antony Loewenstein, journalist and author Mungo MacCallum, journalist and writer Professor Peter Singer, author and academic Adam Bandt, MP Senator Bob Brown Senator Scott Ludlam Julian Burnside QC, barrister Jeff Lawrence, Secretary, Australian Council of Trade Unions Professor Raimond Gaita, author and academic Rob Stary, lawyer  Lieutenant Colonel (ret) Lance Collins, Australian Intelligence Corps, writer The Hon Alastair Nicholson AO RFD QC Brian Walters SC, barrister Professor Larissa Behrendt, academic Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, academic, Sydney Peace Foundation Mary Kostakidis, Chair, Sydney Peace Foundation Professor Wendy Bacon, journalist Christos Tsiolkas, author James Bradley, author and journalist Julian Morrow, comedian and television producer Louise Swinn, publisher Helen Garner, novelist Professor Dennis Altman, writer and academic Dr Leslie Cannold, author, ethicist, commentator  John Birmingham, writer Guy Rundle, writer Alex Miller, writer Sophie Cunningham, editor and author Castan Centre for Human Rights Law Professor Judith Brett, author and academic Stephen Keim SC, President of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights Phil Lynch, Executive Director, Human Rights Law Resource Centre Sylvia Hale, MLC Sophie Black, editor David Ritter, lawyer and historian Dr Scott Burchill, writer and academic Dr Mark Davis, author and academic Henry Rosenbloom, publisher Ben Naparstek, editor Chris Feik, editor Louise Swinn, publisher Stephen Warne, barrister  Dr John Dwyer QC Hilary McPhee, writer, publisher Joan Dwyer OAM Greg Barns, barrister James Button, journalist Owen Richardson, critic Michelle Griffin, editor John Timlin, literary Agent & producer Ann Cunningham, lawyer and publisher Alison Croggon, author, critic Daniel Keene, playwright Dr Nick Shimmin, editor/writer  Bill O’Shea, lawyer, former President, Law Institute of Victoria Dianne Otto, Professor of Law, Melbourne Law School Professor Frank Hutchinson,Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies (CPACS), University of Sydney Anthony Georgeff, editor Max Gillies, actor Shane Maloney, writer Louis Armand, author and publisher Jenna Price, academic and journalist Tanja Kovac, National Cooordinator EMILY’s List Australia Dr Russell Grigg, academic Dr Justin Clemens, writer and academic Susan Morairty, Lawyer David Hirsch, Barrister Cr Anne O’Shea Kathryn Crosby, Candidates Online Dr Robert Sparrow, academic Jennifer Mills, author Foong Ling Kong, editor Tim Norton,  Online Campaigns Co-ordinator,  Oxfam Australia Elisabeth Wynhausen, writer  Ben Slade, Lawyer Nikki Anderson, publisher Dan Cass Professor Diane Bell, author and academic Dr Philipa Rothfield, academic Gary Cazalet, academic Dr David Coady, academic Dr Matthew Sharpe, writer and academic Dr Tamas Pataki, writer and academic Miska Mandic Associate Professor Jake Lynch, academic Professor Simon During, academic Michael Brull, writer Dr Geoff Boucher, academic Jacinda Woodhead, writer and editor Dr Rjurik Davidson, writer and editor Mic Looby, writer Jane Gleeson-White, writer and editor Alex Skutenko, editor Associate Professor John Collins, academic Professor Philip Pettit, academic Dr Christopher Scanlon, writer and academic Dr Lawrie Zion, journalist Johannes Jakob, editor Sunili Govinnage, lawyer Michael Bates, lawyer  Bridget Maidment, editor Bryce Ives, theatre director Sarah Darmody, writer Jill Sparrow, writer Lyn Bender, psychologist  Meredith Rose, editor Dr Ellie Rennie, President, Engage Media Ryan Paine, editor Simon Cooper, editor  Chris Haan, lawyer Carmela Baranowska, journalist. Clinton Ellicott, publisher Dr Charles Richardson, writer and academic Phillip Frazer, publisher Geoff Lemon, journalist Jaya Savige, poet and editor Johannes Jakob, editor Kate Bree Geyer; journalist Chay-Ya Clancy, performer Lisa Greenaway, editor, writer Chris Kennett - screenwriter, journalist Kasey Edwards, author Dr. Janine Little, academic Dr Andrew Milner, writer and academic Patricia Cornelius, writer Elisa Berg, publisher Lily Keil, editor Jenny Sinclair Roselina Rose Stephen Luntz PM Newton Bryan Cooke Kristen Obaid Ryan Haldane-Underwood Patrick Gardner Robert Sinnerbrink  Kathryn Millist Anne Coombs Karen Pickering Sarah Mizrahi Suzanne Ingleton Jessica Crouch Michael Ingleton  Matt Griffin Jane Allen Tom Curtis John Connell David Garland Stuart Hall Meredith Tucker-Evans Phil Perkins Alexandra Adsett Tom Doig, editor  Beth Jackson Peter Mattessi Robert Sinnerbrink   Greg Black  Paul Ashton  Sigi Jottkandt Kym Connell, lawyer Silma Ihram Nicole Papaleo, lawyer Melissa Forbes Matthew Ryan Ben Gook Daniel East  Bridget Ikin Lisa O’Connell  Melissa Cranenburgh John Bryson Michael Farrell Melissa Reeves   Dr Emma Cox Michael Green Margherita Tracanelli David Carlin, writer Bridget McDonnell Geoff Page, writer Rebecca Interdonato Roxane Ludbrook-Ingleton Stefan Caramia Ash Plummer

At the time of this re-blogging, there are 4269 comments on The ABC Drum site to this letter.

[dearjulia]

via @robcorr #ausvotes

[dearjulia]

Her last interview says all that needs to be said about what happened over the weekend. You should have a chat to her and get her on board to help to REALLY "move forward" -- she get's shit done! Actually, the one regret I do have is that I didn't campaign with her over the last couple of months. (I really wanted to, but there were just too many things I needed to deal with at the time.) She's a bloody legend.

[dearjulia]

Hahaha it was so bloody brilliant watching Paul Howes on the #ABCnews24 panel with TJones -- the poor fella looked like he'd seen a ghost. I hope he's going to have less of a say in how things get done in the ALP, now. Because if Mr Rabbit got one thing right in his non-prematurely triumphant speech last night, it was that this country has completely had enough of Howes & Friends' bullshit. Good on those guys for everything they do for their unions, sure. But tell they need to butt out of the ALP. Now. The good thing for everyone is that Senator Ray has already done the review into the last two months' mess. He just happened to have written it two years ago!! Go read it. Regards, Sunili

[dearjulia]

Yawn

Yeah. I get it, Julia: you don't care. Well. Neither do I. It's been an epic couple of weeks for me. And for the first time in years I have been completely over politics. I've been too busy thinking about what matters to me. And none of it involves politics, let alone this election. I can't believe how disenchanted I am -- I turned 26 last week and it is clear the naïve idealism of my yoof has completely disappeared. It's going to be odd to not be handing out How To Votes next week. But I've decided that my Saturdays are more important than being part of Labor's Pamphlet Army. Even on E-Day. Yours in languor Sunili

[dearjulia]

I am getting so much spam from The Libs, Julia — it’s gross.

This came today from Steve Irons — currently member for Swan (that’s my marge electorate).

Apparently he is a ‘single custodian father’ (as @MisterShuffles would say: What The Quack?!), which qualifies him to talk about paid parental leave.

Also, apparently I am the only person in my household of three who is qualified to get spam about paid parental leave.

I live with my boyfriend and my brother and while usually get two copies of everything* I was the only one blessed with this particular marvel.

Apparently I might be planning to have a family and might care about PPL…. but my definitely boyfriend isn’t ………

I heard Andrew Robb being interviewed by Lyndal Curtis this morning and was GOBSMACKED by their whole father-at-the-mother’s-wage thing.

Wow. Not only are they ADMITTING that women get paid less (let’s leave THAT issue for later!)… They are punishing dads AND families at the same time?!

And then ARobb JUSTIFIED IT (ignoring the pay gap, but continuing the sexism) by saying the whole point of the policy was to let MOTHERS BOND WITH THEIR KIDS even though they are begrudgingly letting the ladies back to work because we need more cogs in the machines so we need to keep them in the workforce….

Wow. I honestly didn’t think it’d be possible to get SO MUCH SEXISM INTO A SINGLE POLICY!!!

You cannot let this slide, Julia! This is atrocious!!

Now… I heard about Laurie Oakes’ cabinet leak scoop thingy… And I don’t really care whether or not you supported it or not or if you didn’t what your reasons were.

It’s been a few weeks now and I realise that we probably have different views on what colour the sky is, so, frankly, your opinions mean jack to me any more.

What I still have a tendril of hope / faith / whatever in is your consultative approach (and hey — PPL eventually got through so hurrah).

Maybe you’ll listen to me on just one thing, eh?

Anyway, so yeah, if you do, it’s this: fight back on the bullshit sexism crap from the bastard Tories, ok?

Call them out on absolute crap like this, and those bloody journos asking about Tim’s involvement in campaigning and all that crap.

Tell them to get stuffed. Diplomatically, of course. But do it.

Point out that we’re not in the fifties any more and that neither women NOR MEN in this country will put up with this rubbish any longer.

Thanks in advance,

Sunili

PS: I just glanced at the comparison table on the back of this letter… Is it true that the ALP policy doesn’t pay dads? Because, ok, that is effing lame. Fix that You might as well call it Paid Maternal Leave. There is no way women can have careers AND kids without society normalising the dual role that is needed by both parents (no matter what gender…… I will also leave THAT issue til later…) in order to even have a shot at making it work. So fix it. Don’t punish dads. Because that’s sexism too.

* Two copies of all addressed campaign spam: apparently the AEC think my brother and are married due to the common surname, cause we get joint mail — though, strangely it’s addressed to ‘Mr & Miss’… It’s clearly not for paper saving purposes cause why would the boyf ges his own… again: WTQ?)

[dearjulia]

By the way: the Leaders['] Debate tonight was lame.  This campaign has been lame.  You have been also rather unimpressive.  I'm in a marginal electorate, you know.

Where's the love, Julia?

[dearjulia]

So, Mark Latham's not so crazy after all, is he Julia?

I read his op-ed in Friday's AFR this morning.  I was sitting in the kitchen, the winter sunshine streaming in through the window, sipping my coffee, eating breakfast.  You know -- just chilling, easy-like-a-Sunday-morning style.

But with just about every second paragraph I read, there were audible gasps and / or splutters.  Now, I am usually outraged and offended when I read the papers.  Often this is because most of the time, the papers publish sensationalist drivel (see, eg: @paulwallbank's twitpic from yesterday).

This morning's outrage wasn't due to reading exaggerated crap, though.  It was because I knew that what Latham was saying is true.

I know it's true because I have seen it and experienced it first hand during my 7-something-year involvement with the Australian Labor Party.

I know it is all true because I am an active participant in the Labor Reform Forum (ok, less active since the 2010 State Conference was called of / postponed because of the Election*), which is basically a bunch of ALP members in the WA Branch who are sick of the exact bullshit Latham outlined in his essay.

Even though I am too involved in stuff and promised myself I wouldn't join any more committees and whatever, earlier this year I ran for and was elected to be the non-Parliamentary co-coordinator (how bureaucratic chic, no?), which gave me an even deeper insight into the bullshit.

And ew, does it stink.

People might brush off Latham these days as being the crazy, bitter, old leader dude who lost the plot after he lost the leadership.  But damn: he's right on this.  He is totally, utterly, 100% right. 

On everything.  Everything:

... Robert Michaels wrote of how left-of-centre parties inevitable fall under the control of the apparatchiks, men more committed to the the acquisition of power and social status than the radical reform of economic and social relations. Careerism becomes an end in itself, superseding the policy goals and idealism by which the party was initially founded.

Check.

Labor has become so tightly focussed on opinion polls and communications strategies that serious policy reform is beyond its reach 

... 

Putting communications strategies ahead of sound public policy, for instance, drains Labor of its core beliefs and purpose.

Check, check  (although, Julia, as I have mentioned before: you guys seem totally oblivious to the fact that communication is a two-way thing. But whatever).

What began in the 1980s as a system designed to provide stability for the party's leadership has evolved into a complex network of feuding power bases and personality clashes.  The three original factions -- the national Right, Left and Centre-Left -- have broken down into a series of sub-factions and fiefdoms.

...

After a while, the party itself becomes unrecognisable.  In effect, this is what the factions have achieved

Check, check, totally check.

A party which once aspired to the ideals of grass roots participation became an empty shell.  Instead of directing selecting their parliamentary candidates and guiding the development of Labor policy, local branch members were reduced to election campaign fodder.  Branches were the subject of mass stacking, while the party's conferences became stage-managed charades.

OH. MY. EFFING. CHECK!!!

That last one is the guts of what the Labor Reform Forum is trying to fix. 

But then Party Office Cancelled Christmas State Conference* so we couldn't even try to bring in the rule changes that'll help fix the mess.  Then we had a pro-reform candidate run for the position of WA Branch President a couple of months ago, the first time the members had a chance to directly elect someone to the position, and the unions / factions put up their own little apparatchik candidate who, despite strict rules about using Party resources for campaigning somehow managed to send out automated texts to members telling them to vote. How very grassroots.

Turns out The Man and his mates are just too entrenched.

Wherein lies my dilemma: do I just give up, post one of the resignation letters I have prepared earlier and go join the Greens (Giovanni keeps telling me to) or do I keep fighting for change?

Because even through I have been a branch stack myself, and got Young Labor Exec / National Conference Delegate positions out of factional deals I didn't even know about (I honestly thought they liked me for me. Oh, how naive could I have been?! OMG) I know their stinking game now.

And because I am the kind of person willing to roll up my sleeves and help clean up a smelly mess when I see it, I am trying to do that.  But it's hard and it brings me down and I also have a bajillion other causes I care about that I could be helping with (yeah, know: I am totally Cameron from Modern Family.)

SO yeah: I don't know what to do.

Anyway. I'm not sure I should be asking you for advice given the CV Latham set out for you. So I'm going to shut up now.

Cheers, Sunili

--

*The Cancelling of Christmas State Conference was supposed to be a sensible practical thing aimed at saving money and freeing everyone up to hit the campaign trail. As important as it is that Party members focus their attention on helping get Labor re-elected, I personally queried whether, in some small part (or for the most part?) this was a deliberate plan by Party Office, secretly hoping this would make us shut up. But I am paranoid like that sometimes.  Maybe I should go join Latham in the loony bin?

[dearjulia]

Hi Sunili,Driving along in my car this afternoon, I happened to hear you on Hack, and remembered you from back in the day at PRAC when our little bros used to hang out. I thought, damn, that Sunili is going places! I'm gonna check out her blog when I get home...And I just wanted to congratulate you on a fantastic idea.I'm now an English teacher and I'm going to get my Year 10s to have a read of your blogs and write their own Letters to Julia.I think it's fantastic that young people + technology are making politics cool for young people.Thanks again for the inspiration!Regards,Amy Foster

Oh my goodness, hello Amy! I certainly do remember you - and David! Hope you (and the fam!) are well! I will tell my Dad that you wrote to me, he will be ecstatic :)  Thank you so much for writing back.

I hope your Year 10s enjoy writing their letters, and that they feel that they are able to get engaged in politics.  We certainly can't let it stay a one-way dialogue. We've got to 'move forward' ;)

Cheers!!

[dearjulia]

Heehee @firstdogonmoon's @DanceBandicoot may be the best thing about the election :) I'm having a crappy day -- I decided to post this instead of complaining about stuff and getting even more sooky. Hope you're going alright (see -- I know I keep whinging, but I still like you and stuff). Are you coming to Perth any time soon? I hope we can catch up sometime. Cheers Sunili

[dearjulia]

Dear Sunili Thank you for your email bringing your website to our attention. We’ve passed on the details of your site. Kind Regards

ALP Information Services

[dearjulia]

It's @AIMEmentoring's National Hoodie Day today. They're supporting indigenous kids to achieve things lots of non-indigenous Australians take for granted. There are some bloody amazing non-profits out there doing bloody amazing things with reconciliation projects. I love NGOs -- they focus so much energy (and time and money) on so many good things. But they can't do it all on their own. I know we'd share views on the importance of government action on a fair few things. In relation to indigenous social justice, the list of things you need to address that is in this article from The Drum may seem controversial ... But you know what? I don't actually think they're controversial at all: 1. Reparations for the Stolen Generations 2. Closing the Gap 3. Stolen Wages 4. NT intervention 5. Constitutional Recognition 6. UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People 7. Moving Australia Day They are gosh-darn basic. No argument. What'll be more controversial is if you don't act (or get it wrong). Let me know what you think. Cheers Sunili

[dearjulia]

This is 100% spot-on Julia. You have just GOT to refute the ridiculous idea that immigration is causing the overcrowding in cities/schools/trains. I've seen fairly prominent articles in The Australian about all those "anxious" voters in Lindsay and those other outer-metro marginals. The comments from these "anxious" voters are worrying. There are people out there who seem to be freaking out about immigration when they have absolutely no reason to be upset. In the Weekend Aus from 10 July (p11) there was a quote from a Hywel Blake saying "we don't have the infrastructure or the jobs or the transport to support a big population here at the moment". And yeah, I reckon Hywie's right. There probably is really bad infrastructure out there -- I would confidently say that's the result of the poor planning mentioned in the groupthink article I've linked to. But this was in an article about immigration and asylum seekers and border protection. Not an article about infrastructure. Then then there was this other quote, from another "anxious" Lindsay voter that was in The Oz yesterday -- the Monday after your Regional Cities / roads and drains speech -- and the quote that they printed was (... and, Julia, gosh, did I read this correctly? I would be glad to be corrected here ...) that she didn't want "more Islamic schools built" in her neighbourhood. Well ... That's what I think she said. I don't have it in front of me ... And I didn't read it again so that I could remember it better because I was so upset that I had to walk away from the paper to avoid scrunching it up (it was the café's paper so it would've been bad to scrunch it up). So if that's not the right quote or the right context then please correct me. But if it was the right quote... Well. Damn. And, well... There really isn't a right context for that kinda thing, either -- is there? As I said the other week: I think you're totally right that we can't call people names for being "anxious". But, reallytrulyhonestly, Julia: you need to correct their misunderstandings -- not bow to their ignorance. You need to. You HAVE TO. The best way to attack TAbbott and his "4. stop the boats" business is to prove it wrong. Not try to go lower to beat it. You mentioned your optimism for this country last night on The 7.30 Report: you need to be optimistic about the welcoming, understanding, warm and caring nature of Australians. Not give the benefit of the doubt to the mean-hearted and selfish ones. Give the benefit of the doubt to the ones who misunderstand -- look to their capacity to understand and accept by getting out there and pointing put the facts and explaining the real situation. Obviously there's a right and a wrong way of clearing up the misunderstanding, but I know you've got the tact to not be snobby or condescending about it. And I think people have the humility and wisdom to understand. I honestly can't believe that the majority of Aussies would be "anxious" if they knew the facts. Sure, there are always going to be horrible people who will put "FOWF" bumperstickers on their utes. But the mums and dads in Lindsay and elsewhere surely can't all be like that. And once they understand that refugees aren't the reason why the peak hour traffic jams are getting longer (that's because of the shitty public transport) and that's it's not international students who're causing unemployment (they're the ones cleaning our offices and attending our petrol stations because no one else wants to...), that it is PERFECTLY LEGAL to seek asylum in this country even if you came on a boat (and that then you can go and own a fruit shop and be a tops citizen) and that more migrants come from England and New Zealand (than other you know... Brown places)... Surely once they understand these things they won't be "anxious", right? Right? Oh, Julia, I'm not sure I can handle being corrected on this point...

[dearjulia]

Visit Original Link

Hey Julia -- Kate from Triple J's Hack interviewed me today about my letters to you. I'm on about 15mins in. The rest of the show is good to, though, so if you have time, you should totally listen to it.

The theme is 'does this election really matter'? And it's a bit sad to hear so many you people say they couldn't care less -- or that they're just going to do a blank vote.

You're able to keep this from being a contest between a 'douchebag and a turd sandwich', you know. It's not too late to start listening...

Cheers Sunili

[Hi to all my new readers! And for the ones who've been here from the start: love ya, team! Thank you for your support!!]

[dearjulia]

What do you mean by 'sustainability', Julia?

Cause I think we're on different pages here.  I heard you gave a talk this morning about building a "sustainable Australia", and I thought that you were going to make a tops announcement.

Turned out you were unveiling something about drainage in country towns.

Now, I don't have anything against country towns.  I mean, really, I freaking LOVE going to the Bunbury Forum:  I makes me feel like I'm at Fountain Gate and I keep hoping I might see Kath or Kim.

The thing is, right -- I don't think this "Building Better Regional Cities" business is really gonna Help Keep Australia Sustainable.

Sure, you help set up some satellite city out in "The Regions" somewhere, but isn't what this policy will really do is making it ok to keep letting people have their massive darn McMansions with huge water-sucking lawns and massive pools, without thinking about more efficient ways of living.  Isn't it just gonna encourage urban sprawl in a different way by just urbanising the regions?

Plus, won't all those people with their big comfy houses in "The Regions" still just drive their cars back to the real city for pretty much everything...? Basically, I just don't see how any of this is about sustainability.

It's not sustainability if you're just making it easier for people to keep living they way they're living without facing up to the fact their consumption-driven lifestyles are wasteful.

If you don't believe in a 'big Australia', Julia, don't go about unlocking more land so that people can live just as large as they always have been.

Encourage people to live simpler lives that leave a smaller footprint -- tax breaks for apartments or something? Funding for better public transport in the cities we've already got?? Banning families of 4 having a three storey houses with seven plasmas and a pool???

Now, I actually think the region stuff you put out is pretty good.  I just think you've got it wrong by saying this is about sustainability.  It's really not.  It's about supporting the continuing growth of Australia's population.

Frankly, Julia, this is all about 'Big Australia'.

There's a lot more stuff that has to go into making that growth 'sustainable' than just building a few more housing developments in "The Regions".

And some of that stuff is undoubtedly going to involve encouraging a serious attitude shift in this country.

The question is, are we, as a country, ready & willing to make that shift?

Cheers Sunili

[dearjulia]

An election already?

Wow, Julia -- for some reason I thought you were going to settle in for a while and run the government.  And I (wrongly, I see now) assumed all the election date speculation was just the Press Gallery smoking more crack than usual to keep warm over the chilly Canberran winter.

I guess I can understand you wanting to have some sort of mandate from being 'elected as PM' but that just irks me because I know I can't vote for you: I don't live in Laylor.

Whatever.

The main reason why I was surprised is because there's a similar vibe to the 2008 vote in WA -- you know the un-losable election that the Libs won even through Colin Barney-Rubble had to scurry back from retirement because they were (still are!) such a mess.

And look at the guy now -- he's bloody Mr Popular!!

I was also reminded of the shitness of the ALP that led to the 2008 WA loss through an article Professor Malcolm Farnsworth wrote yesterday about the new Labor Connect thingo... especially this bit:

Will the online forum ever see the light of day in the byzantine innards of the party where decisions are really made? Is this slick technology, replete with pictures of "Julia" smiling down on doting hospital patients, designed to empower its users or merely occupy them? When a user comments on the policy statements posted on Labor Connect, who will ever read it, let alone act on it? And will Labor Connect permit genuine, authentic debate? Will it tolerate full-throated disputation on asylum seekers, climate change policies or an internet filter? The way the ALP approaches Twitter and Facebook is not encouraging. Communication is one-way. Broadcasting, preaching and lecturing dominate. Gillard's 11 tweets since July 4 do not contain a single interaction with a real person.

Your Twitter is rather embarrassing.  As the LOL-Cats catch phrase goes: you're doing it wrong.

And I certainly haven't seen any of that 'consultative' politics business you mentioned on Day 1. It just been preach, preach, preach; non-stop.

Well, Julia: yawn, yawn, yawn.

Frankly, you're just as bad as the other guy (I won't go on at length about you being worse than him on the asylum seeker thing, but, honestly: offshore processing? Were you high, Julia???).

Anyway, I hope you guys remember all the wise words that came out from the Ray Review about the Great WA Election Debacle of 2008 and don't get caught short on 21 August.

Now that you've called the election, I will try harder to write every day.  Even if you're not responding.

Because this way, if I do make the effort, and you still don't care, I won't have to feel guilty for voting against the ALP come 21 August.

Cheers Sunili