Australians Get Their Own SOPA; Attorney General Doesn't Even Bother To See If His Censorship Regime Is Technically Feasible

from the details,-details dept

Tue, Mar 17th 2015 9:32am — Mike Masnick

Back in December, we noted that it appeared that Australia was about to get its own SOPA, and that appears to now be happening. The Australian press is reporting that Attorney General George Brandis is ready to introduce site blocking legislation that mimics SOPA almost directly, in that it would force ISPs to block access to foreign websites, based on claims that those websites facilitated copyright infringement. This was the key part of SOPA, which was rejected, in part, because it would lead to serious concerns about the way in which the underlying internet functioned. Forcing ISPs to block entire sites breaks some fundamental principles of the internet. So, you would think that perhaps the geniuses behind Australia's plan would at least talk to internet providers first before moving forward with this plan, right? Well, you'd be wrong:

John Stanton, CEO of telco industry body the Communications Alliance, said it was "disappointing" that the industry had not been consulted on the bill prior to its impending introduction.

The bill is coming from Australian Attorney General George Brandis, who has been pushing for exactly this for quite some time, after only listening to the entertainment industry voices, and refusing to discuss the issue with consumer advocates, or those who understand the pointlessness and danger of full site blocking. Brandis also has ignored the careful, and detailed, process that the Australia Law Reform Commission went through investigating copyright reform, in which it proposed a number of ways to modernize Australia's copyright system. Instead, Brandis is just focused on giving Hollywood what it wants, with apparently no consideration for what that means for the public or the internet.

Of course, we all know what happened when the US Congress tried to rush through SOPA. It will be interesting to see how Australians react to a similar proposal, pushed by a politician who has made it pretty clear that the technical details of the internet laws he pushes are not that important to him, just so long as he can pretend that he's being "tough" on criminals.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: australia, copyright, george brandis, site blocking, sopa

63 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

antidirt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 8:19am

OMG, SOPA WILL BREAK THE INTERNET!!!

Seriously, though, have you ever considered explaining exactly how SOPA will "break the Internet"? Do you even understand what you mean when you say it? I sincerely doubt it. Substance is not your thing. Prove me wrong?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 8:45am

Re:
Have you ever considered reading the goddamn articles and stopping being an idiot? I don't even doubt it. Substance is not your thing. No need to prove me wrong, I'm not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 8:47am

With those e-mails that leaked from Sony Pictures where the MAFIAA was directly bribing Hood to be their obedient puppy one has to wonder if it is not the case here. If there's a Sony Pictures subsidiary in Australia that would be a good starting point, eh? *winks at Anonymous*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

antidirt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:11am

Re: Re:
Do you agree with my point that Mine has made this claim many times yet never explained exactly how the Internet would be broken? If not, why not?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:29am

Re:
Read the articles that covered the issue where it was explained, it's not our job to condense them if you're too lazy to do so.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
antidirt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:35am

Re: Re:
I believe I have read everything that he said about it. I don't think he has ever explained how it would break the Internet. If you disagree and believe that he has explained it, then present your proof. I don't think you can.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:44am

Re: Re: Re:
I do not agree. This was discussed and explained numerous times, in numerous forums, in depth.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
antidirt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:48am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm not asking about other forums. I'm asking about Mike. Can anyone link to even one single article where Mike explains exactly how it would break the Internet? I doubt it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:48am

Re: What Masnick means by "break" is "prevent piracy".
Piracy, spying, and scams are two basics of the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:50am

Re: Re: What Masnick means by "break" is "prevent piracy".
^^^"two" should have been "the".
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James Burkhardt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:56am

Re: Re: Re:
Here's an article Mike linked to in relation to that very claim that explains that all proposals for how to perform DNS blocking look like a failure of the network or an attack on the network.

http://www.circleid.com/posts/20120111_refusing_refused_for_sopa_pipa/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shmerl, 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:01am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Can't use a search engine?

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111122/04254316872/definitive-post-why-sopa-protect-ip-ar e-bad-bad-ideas.shtml
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Daniel (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:05am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Exactly what is your dysfunction? Just heckling or do you honestly want to know how it will break the internet? Waving a flag screaming "I'm ignorant!" like a flamer at a pride parade and blaming Mike, or anyone else, for it in the process just makes you look foolish. If you honestly want to know: for ISP's to block sites, it would require them to hijack the traffic between users and DNS servers, altering the response or negating the request all together. In layman's terms, they would be "hacking" the data stream between your computer and various core service providers on the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mason Wheeler (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:08am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Come on, folks, don't feed the trolls. Just hit Report and move on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James Burkhardt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:15am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111214/18075617093/former-dhs-assistant-secretary-stewart-baker- sopa-20-still-disaster-cybersecurity.shtml

He went over the technical problems back in 2011
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James Burkhardt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:15am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111214/18075617093/former-dhs-assistant-secretary-stewart-baker- sopa-20-still-disaster-cybersecurity.shtml

He went over the technical problems back in 2011
[ link to this | view in thread ]
James Burkhardt (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:16am

Re: Re: Re:
Also, This post from 2011 where he directly quoted an article explaining it.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111214/18075617093/former-dhs-assistant-secretary-stewart-bak er-sopa-20-still-disaster-cybersecurity.shtml
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shadow Dragon (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:32am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Exactly
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:34am

Re:
Seriously, though, have you ever considered explaining exactly how SOPA will "break the Internet"? Do you even understand what you mean when you say it? I sincerely doubt it. Substance is not your thing. Prove me wrong?

Mike explained this years ago in many many posts when SOPA was happening. Here's one. Next time, do your own homework:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120112/01491417381/paul-vixie-explains-great-detail-why -you-dont-want-policy-analysts-determining-dns-rules.shtml
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:50am

Movies from Spain
...contain more than their fare share of gratuitous sex. Even when the subject of the film is not conducive to a sex scene. And when that scene appears it's less like HBO Game of Thrones sex and more like Behind The Green Door.

This is not (just) because they like sex in Spain, but they're so happy to be free of General Franco's draconian censorship laws. Having a naked couple bumping funnies across the screen says Hooray! We can do this now!

I remember during the short lived Communications Decency Act how Americans would quote sex scenes from classics in their email sig line. For me it was an augmentation of emails that I enjoyed and sometimes miss. Australia may get to enjoy such a rebellion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Roger Strong (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:57am

Trolling George Brandis
Electrical service is just as necessary and enabling to pirates as internet service.

We should suggest to Mr. Brandis that power utilities should be required to prevent their service from being used for piracy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 10:58am

Funny that
It's always funny, though perhaps not in a 'ha ha' way, how those pushing more longer copyrights, and stricter laws, and more draconian enforcement have to fall back on emotional arguments or completely bypass the public entirely.

Those pushing for shorter copyrights on the other hand, more flexible and reasonable laws, and saner enforcement, they seem to have backing evidence a plenty to support their position.

One would almost think that the maximalists always try and bypass the public, and go with emotional arguments and/or personal attacks against those that disagree with them because the evidence isn't on their side... but nah, I'm sure that can't be it. /s
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Spaceman Spiff (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:02am

Just how long?
And just how long will it be after this ill-considered legislation passes that Brandis resigns as AG of Australia and takes a cushy position with the entertainment industry?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:08am

Re: Funny that
The maximalists are corporate interests, only interested in expanding their profit margin, incapable of seeing the long-term and fearing for any disruption to their business model.

So yes, they're always going to expand IP rights even if it means the halting of progress.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:10am

Copyright maximalists & Spying maximalists:
Strange, but constant bedfellows.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tqk (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:15am

Just farm it out to the Chinese.
I'm sure they'd be happy to add Australia to the firewall client list.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tqk (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:26am

Re: Re: What Masnick means by "break" is "prevent piracy".
Piracy, spying, and scams are among [the] basics of life. We go to great lengths teaching our children how to handle this. It's no surprise it's on the net as well. Then again, the net's not all piracy, spying and scams or we wouldn't be here. Some argue copyright infringement is theft, others boycott it all, others resign themselves to blank media levies over which they've no control.

Life.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:27am

Re:
Sopa is like the NSA: it's incompetent, full of ignorance and makes everyone lesss ecure.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:33am

Re:
Everyone knows any type of copyright enforcement will break the internet, right Masnick? lol
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:41am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thanks, I should have linked it to kill his stupidity right away. My bad.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 11:43am

Re: Re: Re:
No you haven't read. You pretended to have read. Otherwise you wouldn't be making a fool of yourself now. I'll paste the link again one reader cared to dig:

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111122/04254316872/definitive-post-why-sopa-protect-ip-ar e-bad-bad-ideas.shtml

I honestly doubt you'll read it though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 12:22pm

Feeding the troll...
Surprised nobody simply linked the category:
https://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=sopa
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 12:45pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The comments's aren't for AJ's sake, they're for newer readers who may not yet be aware of his 'Why won't you debate me?!' history and 'tactics' of claiming that something wasn't explained just because he didn't bother to actually read the articles in which they were.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Baron von Robber, 17 Mar 2015 @ 1:02pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Indeed. It's a public service to point out that AJ is Techdirt's Village Idiot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shadow Dragon (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 1:32pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You mean paid corporate shill
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Shadow Dragon (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 1:32pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You mean paid corporate shill
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Seegras (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 2:04pm

Re: Re:
It's actually quite simple:

Works you have a copyright in get published on the internet without your consent?

Send a mail to the ISP, he'll tell the culprit who will either a) remove it or b) not.

About 90% of the people that actually _really_ do illegal publishing will take it down immediately.

For the rest, open a civil suit. The content will vanish very fast, UNLESS your claim of copyright is bogus.

Problem solved.

You can even streamline this by DEMANDING copyright does not last beyond the death of the artist, and any "orphan" works are immediately turned into public domain. Because then, a lot of the insecurity about whose work it might be and who might be the copyright holder vanishes, leading to a much more clear-cut copyright and to people giving more respect to copyright.

Nothing new, was already said in 1841. http://homepages.law.asu.edu/~dkarjala/OpposingCopyrightExtension/commentary/MacaulaySpeeches.html
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kronomex, 17 Mar 2015 @ 2:50pm

George "Insert Corporate Brand Name Here" Brandis is a right wing fanatic deep in the pockets of Hollywood and other bloodsucking corporations. The problem is that once this maniac is removed at the next election will, and it will probably be Labor (LNP Lite), the laws be changed? Simple answer: NO.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jameshogg (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 3:13pm

The best reason to opposite site blocking is the best one: it can't work.

Though if I were a foreign VPN/proxy website with lots of money to make, I'd do everything I can to make this law pass.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 4:53pm

Re: Just farm it out to the Chinese.
Great plan if you trust China to provide national security. I would look at their human rights record before allowing unfettered access to my communications.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 5:19pm

how is he profiting from it then? This is a man who only does things that get him a hefty amount of money or personal power.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 Mar 2015 @ 5:43pm

Re: Re:
out_of_the_blue just loathes it when due process is enforced.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wotnotnow, 17 Mar 2015 @ 8:32pm

Re: George Brandis and why he is doing this
Firstly, George Brandis is a QC (Queen's Counsel). This position is the highest position that one may obtain as a practising barrister (appearing before the courts in Australia).

In general, anyone who achieves this position considers themselves above anyone else and free to do whatever they like because of their intimate knowledge of the law. In practise, the general rule to follow in dealing with such people is to NOT do any business with them. The general opinion about QC's is that they are the basest people you can meet and that it is better to do business with used car salesmen and criminals than with QC's. QC's tend to be considered as the quintessential nasty crook.

So as George Brandis is a QC, one can only expect the worst possible behaviour and outcomes from him. I do not personally know the man but by all the evidence put before me, I would have to say, in my opinion (which is actually meaningless under law in Australia), that he is not a man to be trusted under any circumstance when it come to creating any legislation at the National Level.

I have seen some of his correspondence and he is not even able to deal with his own party members in a respectful manner, let alone anyone who is a member of the citizenry of Australia.

The only conclusion that one can validly get to by looking at his actions is that he is a "fully bought and paid for" politician (bought and paid for by foreign interests - not even Australian interests).

I am a conservative and I am personally appalled at the behaviour of the current front bench of the governmental party/coalition at this time. I don't expect any proper behaviour from the current opposition parties even though I have diehard supporters for those parties in my family. But at the moment, there are a number of people in parliament who general policies I abhor who are making more intelligent suggestions than the current governmental front bench.

Even though there are some decent representatives to be found across the full range of parties here (at both Federal and State levels), there seems to be a dearth at the leadership levels in any party. All the leadership (as well as many of the backbenchers) across all of the parties (of which we have a much larger range than you have in the USA) seem to be touched with an infantile and corrupt mindset.

The general policies of all parties as found in the various Australia Federal and State legislatures is one of "Screw You to the Citizens", we'll only help our buddies.

Why all the above? Well, I am sure that there is plenty of dirt to be found on George Brandis. It is simply a matter of getting it and publishing this information. However, as with everything like this, all it will do is make a big legal burden for the revealers of this information and nothing much will change.

The revealers will go to gaol and the QC will go free.

The only lawyer that I have met in recent years that I actually liked was a fair dinkum Christian. Strange that, a lawyer who actually follows the tenets of Jesus Christ.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wotnotnow, 17 Mar 2015 @ 8:35pm

Re:
Agreed, for the public outcry by the opposition parties, they want this as much as the current government.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tqk (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:21pm

Re: Re: George Brandis and why he is doing this
All the leadership (as well as many of the backbenchers) across all of the parties (of which we have a much larger range than you have in the USA) seem to be touched with an infantile and corrupt mindset.

To me, it appears as they spend their time in cocktail discussions with marketroids. They don't care to listen to input from the backbenches (ie. IETF, et al).

Nice post btw. Kudos.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
tqk (profile), 17 Mar 2015 @ 9:35pm

Re: Movies from Spain
I remember during the short lived Communications Decency Act how Americans would quote sex scenes from classics in their email sig line.

Well? So? Surely you've saved some examples, anonymized and copyright sanitized (of course)? Cough 'em up. :-|

Just for historical accuracy purposes, you understand.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reality bites, 18 Mar 2015 @ 5:51am

Sadly Aussie's are pussies, they just roll over
Their national position is bend over and grab their ankles without a whimper.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:10am

Re: Sadly Aussie's are pussies, they just roll over
Maybe the threat of a booting scares them into compliance.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:13am

Re: Re: What Masnick means by "break" is "prevent piracy".
So get off it, already! The pirates, spies and scam artists are all in cahoots, you know. O.o
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:19am

Re: Re: Movies from Spain
Oh! Oh! Oh! Ooooh, yeeeeaaaahhhhh!!!

Is that okay for you, tqk? ;P
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:22am

Re: Re: Funny that
Well there's the surveillance, I mean "security" companies to consider. Lot o' jobs to be had in this growing industry, you know. Won't somebody PLEASE think of their children?

So they had a nice little chat with the copyright maximalists and found some common ground...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:23am

Re: Re: Just farm it out to the Chinese.
Is it bad that I'm beginning to say similar things about us?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:24am

Re: Re:
Vote Pirate or Green, end of problem.

The Greens have actually been pretty good on privacy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 18 Mar 2015 @ 7:24am

Re:
He's not profiting from it yet. Think "revolving" and "door." And Chris Dodd.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Padpaw (profile), 18 Mar 2015 @ 8:43am

Re: Sadly Aussie's are pussies, they just roll over
that condition is not limited to Australian citizens.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 18 Mar 2015 @ 11:15am

Winston and Julia
Oh please. They're not hard to look up.

"You like doing this? I don't mean simply me: I mean the thing in itself?"

"I adore it."

That was above all what he wanted to hear. Not merely the love of one person but the animal instinct, the simple undifferentiated desire: that was the force that would tear the Party to pieces. He pressed her down upon the grass, among the fallen bluebells. This time there was no difficulty. Presently the rising and falling of their breasts slowed to normal speed, and in a sort of pleasant helplessness they fell apart. The sun seemed to have grown hotter. They were both sleepy. He reached out for the discarded overalls and pulled them partly over her. Almost immediately they fell asleep and slept for about half an hour.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 18 Mar 2015 @ 11:18am

If only someone WOULD think of the children.
Because they don't when school faculty seek out undressing girls to spy on from their school-issued laptop cameras.

This isn't an incident or two, but nowadays yet another unspoken perk for working at the school.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 18 Mar 2015 @ 11:20am

"Go ahead! Throw your vote away."
Maybe Australia fixed the first-past-the-post problem. Here in the US we haven't, so it's always Kang or Kodos.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Pragmatic, 19 Mar 2015 @ 3:46am

Re: "Go ahead! Throw your vote away."
The trouble is, we've probably got the numbers, but everyone's afraid that either Kang or Kodos will get in if they don't vote Red or Blue. Why don't the people just nut up and vote third party, already?

If enough of us do, even in a first past the post system, we'll get a third party candidate in. Seattle got a full-on Socialist into office because enough people voted for her.

It's about getting the numbers. One vote is not enough. One hundred thousand votes ought to do it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2015 @ 2:19pm

Re: Re: George Brandis and why he is doing this
Many Australians consider this Liberal National Party Federal Government to be the worst ever in Australia'a history, with the current Prime Minister to be the worst ever by a country mile, presided over in the Lower House by the worst ever (again by a country mile) Speaker of the House. They are nothing but a far right wing Tea Party that lied on just about everything to get into power & are now trashing Parliament on such a scale that they hope that no-one will bother voting next time, if they allow a next time.

A Prime Minister who has hidden his renouciation of his British citizenship upon becoming a Member of Parliament, which is written into the Constitution, a man so full of lies that he is even living a big lie, just to hang onto power at all costs. Abbott lies about his lies, then lies again & again & again until people have just turned off listening to him.

Bringing in metadata laws to spy on everyone, whilst at the same time hiding the top 700 private companies' tax details are just but one example of this, using the excuse that kidnappers may kidnap the rich if they see their tax details online. Calling a jewish MP in the opposition Dr. Goebells, pissing off the Irish on St. Patricks Day, & that's just the past few days. Every day they stoop to new unimaginable lows in their rapid destruction of Australian society & the economy.

As for AG Senator Brandis, he is also the Minister for the Arts, so reports directly to Rupert Murdoch the kingmaker for his direction on what to do which saves lobbyists having to deal with two ministers. As soon as he came back into the job he lost for six years whilst in opposition this was what he was expected to do & within 18 months he has delivered his little bit to Rupert. Other Ministers have been busy doing their bit too for Rupert & once they are done they will be rewarded with some nice directors jobs somewhere in News Corp. Brandis wasn't good at his job the last time he was doing it & certainly hasn't bothered to try to improve himself this time around either.

Other things that this government have done on Rupert's behalf has been to trash the National FTTP broadband network to stop any new competition to Foxtel (the real biggie), trying to privatise education (Rupert owns private education companies) & now attempting to further deregulating the media ownership rules in one of the most concentrated media ownership in the world.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 19 Mar 2015 @ 2:35pm

Re: Re: Re: George Brandis and why he is doing this
Just so readers understand how beholden this government is to Rupert Murdoch, the Prime Minister (along with his Chief of Staff) & other senior Cabinet Ministers trot off to New York on a regular basis to get their directions straight from the horse's mouth. This ensures that there are no communication trails that can be intercepted by third parties. Nothing is done without Mr. Murdoch's prior approval, even the PM has admitted he runs ideas by Rupert first before going public, or even to his Cabinet team.

When Tony Abbott does have an independent thought he must call it as his "Captain's pick", so that Rupert isn't tarnished with his complete stupidity, such as giving a knighthood to the Queen's consort, Prince Philip.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
wotnotnow, 22 Mar 2015 @ 1:14am

Re: Re: Re: George Brandis and why he is doing this
A sad time in political landscape, full governmental monitoring (if not defeated in the Senate) brought in by both government and opposition.

We, the people of Australia, have been betrayed by most if not all of our political representatives. Not a single party worth anything.

There are those who consider the current government as the worst in Australian history, but they are wrong. All the current parties are the worst in Australian history. We would see no functional difference if the current opposition was in government.

I personally detest the former Prime Ministers Bob Hawke (the consummate liar) and Paul Keating (the consummate thief) but they are both less harmful than any of the current leadership of the government or opposition parties that we have here in Australia.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 17 May 2015 @ 6:08pm

Re: "Go ahead! Throw your vote away."
Australia has: they use Alternative Vote for the federal and most state lower houses and a broken (and soon-to-be even more broken) version of Single Transferrable Vote for the federal and state upper houses (the brokenness being designed to favour the major parties).
[ link to this | view in thread ]