I don't think there have been any news stories lately showing pictures of politicians physically assaulting each other. I have seen them doing it on the floor of the parliamentary chamber in other places. To the best of my knowledge it hasn't happened here - yet.
It could.
The state election campaign took a nasty turn yesterday. The man who wants to be the kingmaker took the first step towards suing the present leader of the opposition.
He is alleging that the claim he has already done a deal with the present government is libellous. The leader of the opposition has 28 days to respond.
It's a smart tactical move. It puts pressure on the leader of the opposition. There is a deadline to respond just before election day.
It has cost almost nothing but has given the would-be kingmaker plenty of free publicity. He also knows that he will almost certainly never have to go to court over it.
The would-be kingmaker's previous voting record in the Senate is all over the place - or so it would seem. He voted with the present federal government over some issues and against it on others. He voted both for and against the government on some issues.
He also avoided voting on some of the really controversial issues like refugee policy and the cashless welfare card. His "absences" make interesting reading. They are something I find disturbing.
I most certainly would not condone a physical battle on the floor of parliament. I do not condone physical violence at any time.
But, is what this man is doing any better? He appears to want power without responsibility.
That is very dangerous indeed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
I agree about the absences on issues that will have profound effects on the future of our society.
As someone who relies on a government payment through no fault of my own, I live in fear of the 'cashless welfare card'. I think that notion is discriminatory and inequitable. The assumption that everyone receiving a welfare payment is uneducated and unable to manage their affairs is insulting and dangerous, further stigmatising a section of society that is already facing such discrimination as 'postcode snobbery' in job applications etc. We are not all drug, alcohol and gambling addicts.
I manage my affairs very well, thank you very much. Without going into too much detail, I use various accounts for managing different aspects of my finances. It is my understanding that recipients of the cashless welfare card are not allowed to transfer their monies to other accounts. That will mess up my organised payment systems which are working very well for me. I can just see a cashless welfare card causing more problems than it solves for many people who do not have addiction problems (the target of this card).
I spend my money in plenty of places that accept cash like local market stalls etc. I like to 'buy local' and support my local neighbourhood and the enterprising small businesses within it. The cashless welfare card will put an end to that because the card can only be used with registered businesses that have electronic payment systems.
There have been issues in the trial areas (done in regional towns) which creates problems when those residents need to travel to the city or other towns where the cashless welfare card is not in use. Issues like this card will change our society by increasing the gap between the 'haves' and 'have nots'. Like the immigration debates - it is more divisive and does not promote peace and harmony in our society.
Politicians need to take a position on these hard issues which profoundly affect all of us otherwise they are not doing their job.
Post a Comment