Four legs good, two legs better - Abbott's Orwellian shift on debt

Four legs good, two legs better - Abbott's Orwellian shift on debt

This positional change on debt is an Orwellian shift on the grandest scale. 'Four legs good, two legs bad' while in Opposition. When in power: 'Four legs good, two legs better'.

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has been renowned for playing populist politics. In fact, since the Howard years, fear-mongering for popularity has been the hallmark of the federal LNP whenever the polls head south for them. Usually, the fear-mongering revolves around the world's persecuted by trying to claim that victims of war, brutality and terrorism are terrorists. If it's not fear of refugees and Muslims, it's the 'D' words. Debt and Deficit.

While in opposition, Abbott acted more as a pugilist than a politician by constantly attacking Labor's economic policies. He successfully managed to convince the majority of Australians that Labor didn't have to stimulate the economy during the GFC. Considering that Australia dodged recession by less than half a percentage point, just what would have happened had Rudd not dropped billions into the economy to protect jobs and businesses? The Abbott approach of economic austerity would have seen Australia go the way of other western nations. There would have been recession and a blowout in the deficit with increased unemployment and business collapse impacting significantly on government expenses and revenue.

Abbott and his band of ultra-conservative warriors would screw the economy with austerity and trickle-down economic policies that failed in America and throughout Europe.

Austerity increases poverty. Poverty puts a greater burden on the economy through increased government expenditure on support programs for the unemployed and homeless, reduced government revenue through less tax paid by a smaller workforce and less revenue from business as the consumers have less disposable income.

When Abbott took power from Labor in September 2013, debt was travelling at an enviable level of around 13% of GDP. Britain's debt to GDP was 111%, USA was 106% and Greece exceeded 170% ⁽¹⁾.

Yet, Abbott had Australians believing the economy was on the brink of collapse. He rolled out the mantra that we're paying a billion dollars a day in interest. Yet within six months of taking office he doubled the deficit through his so-called 'responsible' economic policies that saw an increase in expenditure to the big-end of town and a decrease in revenue by removing some taxes ⁽²⁾.

Abbott declared a budget emergency when he took office. Yet within days of claiming that under Labor the Australian economy faced a 'Greek-style' disaster, Abbott miraculously healed the economy and claimed that the budget emergency was no longer an emergency. Debt to GDP at 13% under Labor was sending Australia over the precipice, if the Chicken Little 'sky is falling' politics of the LNP in Opposition was to be believed. Now at 15%, Abbott claims Australia can handle debt to GDP at 60% ⁽³⁾.

This positional change is an Orwellian shift on the grandest scale. 'Four legs good, two legs bad' while in Opposition. When in power: 'Four legs good, two legs better'.

To quote Orwell's 'Animal Farm':

All the sheep burst out into a tremendous bleating of, 'four legs good, two legs BETTER. Four legs good, two legs BETTER. Four legs good, two legs BETTER'. ⁽⁴⁾

All Labor debt bad, all LNP debt good.

With such a massive disparity in messages from this government, do Australians really believe anything Abbott says?

Australia's economy was the strongest in the western world following the GFC thanks to the Rudd/Swan stimulus packages.

Debt needs to be managed through structural reform, such as reducing concessions to the wealthy and improving standards for the less wealthy. However, to effectively manage debt the economy needs stimulus. Saul Eslake of Bank of America Merrill Lynch has stated the economy needs 'short-term fiscal stimulus that's well targeted' ⁽⁵⁾. It doesn't need austerity. It needs responsibility.

The Abbott government is on track for an $80 billion increase in debt over the four years to 2017-18 ⁽⁶⁾. Much of this is because their socially irresponsible budget in 2014 which slashed funding to education, health and welfare, resulting in many of its big 'savings' (read austerity) measures being blocked in the Senate. His first budget attacked the largest consumer group, namely those at the lower end of the wage spectrum. At the same time, the government gave billions to large multinational companies through subsidies and tax offsets.

Abbott tried to use the recently-released inter-generational report to further his economic scare-mongering, yet it predicted the deficit to average less than 1% of GDP for the next decade ⁽⁷⁾.

What does Abbott stand for? What keeps him awake at night? What means most to him?

On 20 March 2015, former Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser died. Fraser's great passion, the thing that kept him awake at night, was human rights. He campaigned for the rights of asylum seekers and was heavily critical of the abusive and harmful policies of Labor and Liberal that played on the fears of bigots. Accolades flowed from both sides, praising the old statesman. Tellingly, Abbott's comment was 'He had correctly read the mood of the public' ⁽⁸⁾. Only a politician who is kept awake at night worrying about the polls and his own power would say something like that.

Abbott has no concept of economic management. The economic policies of Abbott and his 'Team Australia' are destroying the living standards of those most vulnerable. He is robbing the poor and giving to the rich, driving up debt and deficit with it.

Abbott governs by popularity polls which he attempts to manipulate by coercion and fear. He is not a statesman and will never be held in the same regard as Fraser.


References:

1. The Conversation, Raja Junankar, 'The state of Australia - the economy', 8 May 2014. http://theconversation.com/the-state-of-australia-the-economy-26230. Accessed 20 March 2015.

2. ABC News, 'Fact check: Has the Government doubled the budget deficit?', 10 June 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392. Accessed 14 February 2015.

3. The Australian Financial Review, Phillip Coorey and Jacob Greber, 'Abbott loses the plot on debt', 19 March 2015. Accessed 19 March 2015.

4. Orwell, George. Animal Farm. Great Britain: Penguin, 1987. Print.

5. ABC 7.30, Leigh Sales, 'Budget on the mend' says PM, facing headlines claiming he's 'lost the plot', 19 March 2015, http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4201187.htm. Accessed 20 March 2015.

6. The Australian Financial Review, Laura Tingle and Phillip Coorey, 'Budget gets $80b worse under Libs', 20 March 2015. Accessed 20 March 2015.

7. The Guardian, Stephen Koukalis, 'Ignore the intergenerational report scaremongering - the news is good', 19 March 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/19/ignore-the-intergenerational-report-scaremongering-the-news-is-good. Accessed 19 March 2015.

8. The Guardian, Katherine Murphy, 'Malcolm Fraser, former Australian Prime Minister, dies aged 84', 20 March 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/20/malcolm-fraser-dies-aged-84. Accessed 21 March 2015.

Also refer to: Ranting Panda, 'Australia's manufactured debt crisis', 14 February 2015, http://thepandarant.blogspot.com.au/2015/02/australias-manufactured-debt-crisis.html.

Workers of the World Unite!

There is a war on workers; on their rights, on their wages and conditions. The war is being waged by business groups aided and abetted by the conservative government, formed through a coalition of the Liberal and National Parties. Liberal in the sense of economic liberalism not social liberalism, in case anyone is wondering. Economic liberalism is essentially free market capitalism ... which is free for everyone except those who work or consume ... oh, wait, that is pretty much everyone! Free market capitalism is free for no-one except the ultra-wealthy, the multinationals. Everyone else is just a pawn to be used and abused.

Under former Prime Minister John Howard, the Liberal Party introduced Work Choices which eroded, and in some cases demolished, the rights of workers. Those hardest hit were in the retail and hospitality sectors. WorkChoices meant no choice for workers. It left workers to negotiate their wages and conditions by themselves, without the solidarity, support and collective power of Unions. The only choice it gave was for businesses to exploit workers through lower pay and reduced conditions.

The latest push by the Business Council of Australia is for penalty rates to be abolished. They argue that penalties are crippling business. What we don't hear them complain about is the amount of unpaid overtime worked by many employees. In 2014, Australians gave up $110 BILLION in unpaid overtime⁽¹⁾. Apparently it's ok for businesses to eschew their responsibility to pay workers but not for workers to claim what's due to them.

Back to the coalition aiding and abetting big business. Not long after getting into power in 2013, the coalition established a Royal Commission into Union corruption. It was entirely a political exercise aimed at discrediting and destroying Union solidarity and membership. It was aimed at undermining worker confidence in Unions. Yet, it was Unions who won all the rights that workers have, including weekends, holidays, penalty rates, a forty hour week. Without Unions these rights would never have been won and will certainly be lost.

Many workers have fallen for lies about Union corruption ... as if Business isn't corrupt. What is it called when businesses engage in price fixing, tax avoidance, collusion? What about lobbying of politicians and political donations for favourable treatment?

Queensland's Liberal National Party government under the authoritarian Campbell Newman, banned Union advertising unless the majority of Union members voted for it. This added time, cost and complexity to the process. Newman also tried to ban Union donations to the Australian Labor Party. Meanwhile the LNP lifted its reporting limits on donations so that it could remove transparency of donations made by businesses to the LNP. These moves only increased the potential for corruption in the LNP while undermining ALP's donor base and weakening the power of Unions to defend their workers.

To ensure the vote of the worker, the LNP has systematically mounted a campaign of terror so that workers will cringe in fear behind the protective loins of the ruling class; gladly relinquishing their rights and wages for the misguided belief that only the LNP and the wealthy will protect them from the ravaging hordes of socialists, welfare recipients and asylum seekers.

Rupert Murdoch, one of the richest and most influential men in the world, owns most of the media in Australia and is a strong backer of the LNP. Is it any wonder then that much of the articles published by his stable are either pro-LNP or anti-Labor, anti-Greens, anti-Union, anti-anyone opposed to the LNP.

Malcolm X nailed it when he said, 'If we're not careful the newspapers, will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing'.

How true that is.

Most LNP voters are not particularly wealthy. They have been conditioned by conservative rhetoric to hate those on welfare even though many are a pay-check from welfare themselves. For many workers, their jobs are not secure as employers continue cutting costs, usually by reducing their workforce in the first instance. This doesn't just impact workers, it impacts business because people who are out of work obviously have less disposable income to spend.

How many times do we see the RBA announce interest rate cuts designed to stimulate the economy by giving working families and small-businesses more disposable income, and the big banks failing to pass on the cuts as they cry poor. Within a few months, the banks often announce record profits, usually followed by staff cuts. There is no loyalty to staff or consumers in free market capitalism.

For decades the Liberal Party has claimed that it is more pro-military than Labor. Certainly they've had no qualms against sending the military into battle, whether it was Iraq, Afghanistan or unleashing them on asylum seekers arriving by sea. Yet the Abbott government's love of the military ends there. When it comes to pay and conditions, the LNP has royally screwed the military by giving them a 4.5% pay rise over three years. However, Defence Department public servants didn't receive even that much. They only got 3.16% over three years⁽²⁾. This pay 'rise' will be paid in two instalments of 1.98% in the first year and 1.18% in the second year⁽³⁾. This is less than inflation which is currently at 2.7% per annum.

If the LNP is happy to screw over the military what stops it screwing over civilians?

When it comes to other federal public servants it gets even worse. The Australian Taxation Office has been given just 0.8% pay rise⁽⁴⁾. Less than 30% the rate of inflation. In addition, they've been forced to work an extra 9 minutes a day for no extra pay; 45 minutes extra per week. They've also lost a $300 annual health and well-being allowance. Of the approximately 25,000 staff who work for the ATO, 3,000 have lost their jobs with an additional 1700 scheduled to go⁽⁵⁾.

Pay rises for the military and public servants should be at least 8% over the next three years if they are to keep pace with inflation, otherwise the buying power of their income will be greatly reduced.

The government is aiming to strip Immigration Department staff of their rights to unfair dismissal appeals. If the Australian Border Force Bill gets through parliament, staff could be sacked for 'serious misconduct' without the right to appeal to the industrial umpire⁽⁶⁾. Considering that Australia's legal system is based on 'innocent until proven guilty', all workers should be able to appeal against any claim made against them.

Why would any worker vote for such an anti-worker party?

Then there is the LNP rhetoric about our economy being cactus because of the Labor Party. This debt and deficit mantra that they keep banging on about is a smokescreen. If the LNP was serious about bringing down the deficit they wouldn't be attacking wages and conditions. Why? Because the more that people earn, the more tax they pay which boosts government revenue and reduces the deficit. In addition, the more people earn the more they spend, boosting profitability of business and increasing tax revenue while reducing the deficit.

In the 2012-13 budget, the LNP dropped $1 billion into the coffers of big business. In addition, businesses took $300 billion of earnings off-shore to avoid tax⁽⁷⁾. All of this, while the government bemoaned the cost of welfare and wanted to force people to wait six months before claiming the dole⁽⁸⁾. Six months without any income? The LNP has an idealistic view that people should either 'earn or learn'. There is no abundance of jobs, so how do people feed, house or clothe themselves and their families? If we're not earning we should be learning according to the LNP. Learn? At a time when the government is deregulating universities fees which will result in education becoming unaffordable for many. At a time when LNP governments have reduced funding to TAFE colleges. Earn or learn? More like, earn or burn! The LNP is happy to sacrifice the lives of the unemployed for political expediency. And sadly, many people who are impacted by these policies are happy to vote LNP.

Australia - a country of lifters and leaners according to the LNP. Who's doing the lifting? The heavy lifting is being done by workers, not by big business. It is the large companies and the wealthy that exploit the workers and then cry poor.

Take Luke Mangan for instance. He has an $80 million food empire. Apparently, paying Sunday penalty rates has unacceptable impact on the price of steak, so he doesn't even bother opening his restaurant ⁽⁹⁾. An $80 million empire that doesn't want to pay penalty rates. Even Campbell Newman, the illustrious former Premier of Queensland, rued the impact of penalty rates on the cost of spaghetti ⁽¹⁰⁾! Paint me pink and cover me in peppercorn sauce ... since when did industrial relations come down to the price of spaghetti or an eye-fillet! I'd rather pay more for a steak or a spaghetti and know that the people who are working hard to prepare my meal are getting paid a fair wage. How could I enjoy my meal if said staff are getting screwed over so that some greedy business owner can get fat and rich off the weekends or evenings sacrificed by the hard work of their employees.

Penalty rates may not seem like a great deal for those who don't get them, but they can have a massive impact on those who do. For instance, a retail worker could lose around a quarter of their wage if penalty rates are abolished ⁽¹¹⁾. The retail sector is one of the largest employment sectors in the country. That is a lot of money to take off people who are already barely making ends meet on minimum wage.

And then there is the Hoteliers Association who figure that they should pay penalty rates. Bravo to them! Except they want a two-tiered system in which workers get paid lower penalty rates for working State public holidays (such as Melbourne Cup) than if they worked national public holidays such as Christmas or New Year ⁽¹²⁾.

Abolishing penalty rates would have a dramatic impact on the economy. Many workers rely on penalties to survive. If they don't have the money, at best they won't spend. At worst, they will require welfare to meet the bills.

Federal Treasurer Joe Hockey has presided over one of the lowest wages growth in 20 years and he believes this is good news ⁽¹³⁾. In the meantime, his government continues on a path to sack public servants, adding to the unemployment queue, while offering minimal pay rises for those who remain. In fact, at one stage, the staff of Employment Minister Eric Abetz were only offered a 0.5% pay rise. It's an insult to all workers ⁽¹⁴⁾.

The LNP may claim that WorkChoices is 'dead, buried and cremated', however, they're having a wow of a time raising it from the dead and giving it a new identity; patching it together like an industrial relations frankenstein, made up of the body parts of economic rationalism and the selected organs and limbs of the 'dead' WorkChoices. It's Zombie IR.

The Productivity Commission (an Orwellian term for 'worker exploitation') has been commissioned to review wages, penalty rates and workplace mobility. One of the recommendations from the Productivity Commission is to reduce the minimum wage by 1% per annum over the next 10 years ⁽¹⁵⁾. No mention of reducing the vulgar executive salaries that many companies pay. No. Instead, hit the minimum wage. Hit the people perceived to have the least power. Obviously people on the minimum wage have too much money and can afford to subside CEOs being paid a motza.

Karl Marx nailed it when he wrote, 'from each according to his ability, to each according to his need'. Rather than screwing low-paid workers down even further, it's time for the higher paid, for business owners, for big business, to step up and pay their dues.

It's the hard working efforts of workers and the money they spend as consumers, that ensures the success of business. So why do many of these workers oppose Unions and vote for their oppressors? Many have fallen for the lie of trickle down economics. The idea that the more the wealthy have, the more will trickle down to the plebs at the bottom. What rot! The more the wealthy have the more they keep. Trickle down economics was discredited years ago when it failed under Thatcher and Reagan, costing the livelihoods of thousands of workers.

Workers instead should be voting against attacks on their conditions. They should be members of Unions and fight against any attempt to undermine their livelihoods and rights.

Business and Government needs workers and it needs a cashed-up market place for revenue. Workers with no money are more damaging to business and the economy than workers being paid penalty rates.

Workers of the world unite.

Collectively fight against exploitation.

United we stand, divided we fall.

References

1. Business Insider Australia, Sarah Kimmorley, 19 November 2014, 'Australians Give Up $110 Billion To Their Employers in Unpaid Overtime Every Year', http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australians-give-up-110-billion-to-their-employers-in-unpaid-overtime-every-year-2014-11. Accessed 8 February 2015.

2. Brisbane Times, Phillip Thomson, 20 February, 2015, ''I regret': Defence boss' tough email to 20,000 staff over pay offer', http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/public-service/i-regret-defence-boss-tough-email-to-20000-staff-over-pay-offer-20150219-13j73i.html. Accessed 22 February 2015

3. The Australian, Sarah Martin, 'Defence boss rues bum pay deal', 20 February 2015, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/defence/defence-boss-rues-bum-pay-deal/story-e6frg8yo-1227226118331. Accessed 22 February 2015.

4. Sydney Morning Herald, Phillip Thomson, 'Anger spreads: Australian Taxation Office moves toward industrial action', 20 February 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-service/anger-spreads-australian-taxation-office-moves-toward-industrial-action-20150220-13ki1y.html. Accessed 22 February 2015.

5. The Canberra Times, Nassim Khadem and Noel Towell, 'Blood letting at Tax Office takes hold', 17 January 2015, http://www.canberratimes.com.au/business/blood-letting-at-tax-office-takes-hold-20150115-12f2kc.html. Accessed 25 February 2015.

6. Canberra Times, Noel Towell, 'Public servants face fast-track to the sack', 2 March 2015, http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/public-service/public-servants-face-fasttrack-to-the-sack-20150302-13sbmp.html. Accessed 3 March 2015.

7. Australian Labor, 'Their fair share - stopping multinational tax avoidance', http://www.alp.org.au/fairshare. Accessed 2 March 2015.

8. News.com.au, 'Peta Credlin's power trip over dole policy', 15 February 2015, http://www.news.com.au/national/peta-credlins-power-trip-over-dole-policy/story-fncynjr2-1227220063210. Accessed 17 February 2015.

9. Daily Telegraph, John Lehmann, 'Restaurateur Luke Mangan blasts “ridiculous” penalty rates and lost work ethic', 21 February 2015, http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/restaurateur-luke-mangan-blasts-ridiculous-penalty-rates-and-lost-work-ethic/story-fni0cx12-1227232937517. Accessed 28 February 2015.

10. Brisbane Times, Daniel Hurst, 'Newman weighs into Howard, Abbott IR debate', 28 August 2012, http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/newman-weighs-into-howard-abbott-ir-debate-20120828-24xkx.html. Accessed 22 February 2015.

11. The Age, Josh Gordon, 'Premier Daniel Andrews accuses Tony Abbott of secret plan to cut Victorians' wages by up to one-third', 27 February 2015, http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/premier-daniel-andrews-accuses-tony-abbott-of-secret-plan-to-cut-victorians-wages-by-up-to-onethird-20150226-13pf1i.html. Accessed 28 February 2015.

12. The Australian, 'Push for two-tiered public holidays', 23 February 2015, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/push-for-two-tiered-public-holidays/story-fn3dxiwe-1227235472750. Accessed 28 February 2015.

13. The Guardian, Greg Jericho, 'The worst wages growth in 20 years is Joe Hockey's 'good news' '. 2 March 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2015/mar/02/the-worst-wages-growth-in-20-years-is-joe-hockeys-good-news. Accessed 2 March 2015.

14. Sydney Morning Herald, Anna Patty, 'Strikes looming against Abbott's industrial relations agenda', 19 February 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/strikes-looming-against-abbotts-industrial-relations-agenda-20150219-13i221.html. Accessed 22 February 2015.

15. The Guardian, Van Badham, 'The only certainty of a reduced minimum wage is a lot more poor people', 27 January 2015, http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/27/the-only-certainty-of-a-reduced-minimum-wage-is-a-lot-more-poor-people. Accessed 2 February 2015.

Shooting the messenger

It's no secret that the current Australian government has a responsibility problem. Every interview, every soundbite is scripted to blame others, and Labor in particular. Recently, Queensland and Victoria's LNP governments went down in history as one-termers. Outgoing Queensland Premier, Campbell Newman, unable to take responsibility for the loss, turned on his colleagues, claiming it was their fault. Just after the election he blamed Labor and Unions as if there was something wrong with them campaigning against his attacks on workers.

This blame game, apparently in the DNA of the LNP, has now morphed into shooting the messenger ... the whistle-blower.

Freya Newman blew the whistle on Prime Minister Abbott's daughter, Frances, being granted a $60,000 scholarship for a Bachelor of Design course. The revelations were published on New Matilda ⁽¹⁾. While the Abbott government was planning to deregulate university fees that would drive up the cost of degrees, Freya Newman revealed that a secret deal was done in 2011 while Abbott was Opposition leader, with the Whitehouse Institute of Design which granted the scholarship. This was at a time when the Whitehouse Institute claimed on its website that it didn't provide scholarships. Abbott failed to disclose the gift which he was required to do as an MP.  Freya Newman worked in the Institute's library and had illegally accessed files through the college's computer network to reveal the gift. The Whitehouse Institute is chaired by Les Taylor, a Liberal Party donor and long-term friend of Tony Abbott ⁽²⁾. It raises the question of lobbying and whether the Whitehouse Institute was expecting benefits to flow their way. The Whitehouse Institute, like many private colleges, is a recipient of government funding ⁽³⁾. Abbott claims that the college didn't lobby for funds ... then again, he also said he complied with the rules of disclosure ⁽⁴⁾.

How did Abbott respond to this allegation of an undeclared personal gift? He attacked the whistleblower and Freya Newman was subsequently charged. After five harrowing months, Freya Newman faced court and pleaded guilty. The Magistrate sentenced her to a two year bond but did not record a conviction as Newman's actions were not 'driven by greed or any desire to embarrass Ms Abbott'. ⁽⁵⁾

Prime Minister Abbott has attacked the ABC on a number of occasions for blowing the whistle. For instance, when the ABC reported allegations of abuse of asylum seekers by Royal Australian Navy personnel. Surely it would have been prudent to investigate the matter rather than shoot the piano player.

Of course, this isn't the only report that Abbott and his government have criticised the ABC for. It seems any report that criticises the government is 'biased' according to the government. The ABC may be funded by the Australian government but it isn't Pravda ... it isn't the mouthpiece of the government.

The ABC reported, along with the Guardian, a phone hacking scandal in which the Australian government under former Prime Minister Rudd had been monitoring phone calls from senior Indonesian government officials, including the wife of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono⁽⁶⁾. The report was based on National Security Agency documents that were leaked by Edward Snowden, former computer contractor with the NSA.

In relation to both of these events, Abbott accused the ABC of being unpatriotic and stated that the ABC was on 'everybody's side but Australia's'. He accused Edward Snowden of being a traitor for revealing illegal behaviour by the Australian and American governments. Ironically, Abbott also stated that the ABC should give the Navy the 'benefit of the doubt'⁽⁷⁾. Ironic because Abbott declared that Australia had to stop giving the benefit of the doubt to asylum seekers ⁽⁸⁾. So, based on this logic it's ok to give benefit of the doubt for allegations of abuse by military personnel but not to give the benefit of the doubt to people fleeing persecution and abuse.

Recently, the Australian Human Rights Commission released its 'Forgotten Children' report which blew the whistle on systemic abuse of asylum seekers, particularly children, in immigration detention on Nauru and Manus Island. The report documented serious issues of abuse that had resulted in physical and mental illness in children. It reported suicide attempts, deteriorating mental and physical health and a basic lack of human rights by the Australian government. The report called for a Royal Commission into the treatment of children in immigration detention. Instead of acting on the report to ensure children were not abused, that their human rights were respected and a Royal Commission held, Abbott tried to have the President of Human Rights Commission, Gillian Triggs, sacked for the report ⁽⁹⁾. He accused the report of being partisan even though the abuse it documented commenced under the previous Labor government. Triggs revealed the information while Abbott and his then Immigration Minister, Scott Morrison, perpetuated the abuse.

On 16 February 2015, ABC's Four Corners program revealed wide-spread incidence of live-baiting within the greyhound racing industry. Live-baiting includes the use of live animals, such as rabbits, piglets and possums, to train greyhounds who run them down and kill them. It is illegal and it is cruel. The report resulted in the entire board of Greyhound Racing NSW being stood down ⁽¹⁰⁾. Agriculture Minister, Barnaby Joyce, attacked the ABC and the whistle-blowers who had trespassed in order to gain the evidence⁽¹¹⁾. Of course, had they not trespassed the scandal wouldn't have been exposed.

Contrast this to when Four Corners revealed allegations of the brutal slaughter of live exports to Indonesia. Then Prime Minister Gillard banned live exports until Indonesia could prove animal welfare safeguards were in place ⁽¹²⁾. Although she eventually gave into agriculturalists and resumed live trade, she didn't shoot the messenger.

Former Prime Minister Howard had a record of attacking whistle-blowers too. He attacked and attempted to discredit intelligence analyst, Andrew Wilkie, who blew the whistle over the false 'weapons of mass destruction' claims being used to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003 ⁽¹³⁾. Wilkie quit his job and entered politics, initially as a Greens candidate and then as an independent member.

Attorney-General George Brandis has called for the jailing of an ASIS officer who revealed that Australia had been spying on East Timor Cabinet during negotiations for the Timor Sea Treaty ⁽¹⁴⁾.

These are not facetious or trivial claims, so why is the government attacking the whistle-blower instead of taking action on the claims. The Abbott government is introducing legislation to jail journalists who publish Snowden-style leaks⁽¹⁵⁾. The government is clearly opposed to freedom of speech and particularly opposed to those who reveal the misconduct, or the possibility of misconduct, by the government or its agencies.

In 2014 the government changed the rules for whistle-blowing which made it an offence for a whistle-blower to go public rather than keep the matter internal⁽¹⁶⁾. This means that those within an agency, or even the Minister, could try to shut down the whistle-blowing without ever acting on it. Given the government's history of shooting the messenger, federal public servants may be more inclined to 'leak' the information rather than come out as the whistle-blower.

Gonzo journalist, Hunter S. Thompson said, 'There are always risks in challenging excessive police power, but the risks of not challenging it are more dangerous, even fatal'. This quote doesn't just apply to police powers, but to government power, behaviour, policy ... and those things they government wants suppressed or hidden.

What ever happened to transparency and good government?

Surely good government includes doing the right thing, caring for people and acting on allegations of impropriety.

Rather than shooting the messenger, the government should heed the message.

Update 9 March 2015

The United Nations has released a report into Australia's detention centres and found that they breach the international convention on torture. Abbott's response? Shoot the messenger! Instead of being horrified by the report, Abbott stated that Australians are 'sick of being lectured by the United Nations' ⁽¹⁷⁾.

The report found a number of breaches of the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, including the indefinite detention of children and the deportation of Sri Lankan asylum seekers. It's no surprise that Abbott has shot the messenger. After all, Abbott and his government unleashed an unprecedented attack on Gillian Triggs, President of the Human Rights Commission for reporting the systemic physical and mental abuse of children in Australia's detention centres.

Abbott's behaviour clearly shows that he has no concern with child abuse or torture. Instead, he is genuinely horrified that someone would dare call him out on it. His behaviour, and that of his minister's, condones child abuse, condones torture, condones human rights abuses.

What sort of amoral human being ignores abuse and torture, ignores the perpetrators of it, ignores the role his government and government policies have played, but attacks the whistle-blower.

Abbott provided Sri Lanka with two naval vessels to hunt down and capture anyone who dared try to escape the brutality of the Sri Lankan government. Four days before the release of the UN report, the Sri Lanka Campaign for Peace and Justice reported that 84% of people in north-east Sri Lanka have experienced a family member being detained ⁽¹⁸⁾. The Campaign was pleading with the British Home Office not to tighten rules on asylum seekers from Sri Lanka because the situation is as dangerous as it ever was. Disturbingly, they warned of reprisal actions by Sri Lanka's paramilitary organisations. The UN has also stated serious concerns about the level of torture in this country. The same country whose torture and human rights abuses Abbott sponsors and is happy to return asylum seekers to.

Is it any wonder then, that Abbott has not grasped the gravity of the UN report into Australia's breaches of the torture convention. This is a government of cruel, fascist politicians who consolidate power through fear-mongering. They attack the most vulnerable in the world purely for political expediency.

A UN report that identifies Australia's detention policies amount to torture and human rights abuses. An Australian Human Rights Commission report that identifies ongoing abuse of children because of Australia's detention policies. For each report, the Abbott government attacked the author rather than defending the victims against the abuse and torture reported.

What next? Will the government start blaming rape victims for being raped?

Blaming the victim is the hallmark of the coward and the corrupt.

Based on the government's response to these reports, it's failure to act or take responsibility, it is clear that Abbott presides over a depraved, corrupt and criminal government.


References

1. New Matilda, Chris Graham and Max Chalmers, 21 May 2014, 'Leaked Documents Cast Doubt On Abbott's $60k Scholarship Claims', https://newmatilda.com/2014/05/21/leaked-documents-cast-doubt-abbotts-60k-scholarship-claims. Accessed 19 February 2015.

2. Sydney Morning Herald, Dan Harrison and Daisy Dumas, 21 May 2014, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-friend-linked-to-60000-scholarship-for-frances-abbott-at-private-college-20140521-38olh.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

3. Whitehouse Institute of Design, http://whitehouse-design.edu.au/courses/vetis/general-information.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

4. SBS, Source AAP, 'College didn't lobby for funds: Abbott', 23 May 2014, http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/05/23/college-didnt-lobby-funds-abbott. Accessed 19 February 2015.

5. SBS, Gary Cox with AAP, 'No conviction for student who leaked Frances Abbott's scholarship details', 25 November 2014, http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2014/11/25/no-conviction-student-who-leaked-francis-abbotts-scholarship-details. Accessed 19 February 2015.

6. ABC, Michael Brissenden, 'Australia spied on Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, leaked Edward Snowden documents reveal', 5 December 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-18/australia-spied-on-indonesian-president-leaked-documents-reveal/5098860. Accessed 19 February 2015.

7. ABC, Latika Bourke, 'Prime Minister Tony Abbott says ABC not on Australia's side in interview with 2GB', 4 February 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-29/tony-abbott-steps-up-criticism-of-abc/5224676. Accessed 19 February 2015.

8. Sydney Morning Herald, Liam Mannix, 'Bad people' treating us as mugs: Abbott's national security warning, 15 February 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bad-people-treating-us-as-mugs-abbotts-national-security-warning-20150215-13f3bd.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

9. Sydney Morning Herald, Michael Gordon, 'Revealed: Abbott government tried to remove Gillian Triggs as head of the Australian Human Rights Commission', 14 February 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/revealed-abbott-government-tried-to-remove-gillian-triggs-as-head-of-the-australian-human-rights-commission-20150213-13du7s.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

10. Sydney Morning Herald, Natalie O'Brien and Chris Roots, 'NSW Racing boss says no excuses for live baiting of greyhounds at training', 19 February 2015, http://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw-racing-boss-says-no-excuses-for-live-baiting-of-greyhounds-at-training-20150219-13iwj7.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

11. The Australian, Jared Owens, 'Barnaby Joyce criticises activists in greyhound live-bait expose', 17 February 2015, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/barnaby-joyce-criticises-activists-in-greyhound-live-bait-expose/story-e6frg6nf-1227223167503. Accessed 19 February 2015.

12. Sydney Morning Herald, Richard Willingham and Tom Allard, 'Ban on live cattle trade to Indonesia', 8 June 2011, http://www.smh.com.au/national/ban-on-live-cattle-trade-to-indonesia-20110607-1frdg.html. Accessed 19 February 2015.

13. The Age, AAP, 'Personal attacks don't explain war: Wilkie', 23 August 2003, http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/08/23/1061529370330.html?from=storyrhs. Accessed 19 February 2015.

14. Crikey, Bernard Keane, 'Brandis moves to jail whistleblower and lawyer for revealing ASIS scandal', 1 September 2014, http://www.crikey.com.au/2014/09/01/brandis-moves-to-jail-whistleblower-and-lawyer-for-revealing-asis-scandal. Accessed 19 February 2015.

15. The Guardian, Paul Farrell and Daniel Hurst, 'Journalists will face jail over spy leaks under new security laws', 16 July 2014, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/16/journalists-face-jail-leaks-security-laws. Accessed 19 February 2015.

16. Lowy Institute, The Interpreter, 'The silence of the lambs: The public service, leaks, and whistleblowing in Australia', 2 May 2014, http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2014/05/02/The-silence-of-the-lambs-Leaks-and-whistle-blowing-in-Australia.aspx. Accessed 19 February 2015.

17. The Age, Lisa Cox, 'Tony Abbott: Australians 'sick of being lectured to' by the United Nations, after report finds anti-torture breach', 9 March 2015, http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-australians-sick-of-being-lectured-to-by-united-nations-after-report-finds-antitorture-breach-20150309-13z3j0.html. Accessed 9 March 2015.

18. Tamil Guardian, '84% of people in North-East have had a family member detained, says Sri Lanka Campaign', 5 March 2015, http://www.tamilguardian.com/article.asp?articleid=14000. Accessed 6 March 2015.

Australia's manufactured debt crisis

Treasurer Joe Hockey has been sounding the drums of economic war by proclaiming the Australian economy faces a 'budget emergency'. Key to this is his claim that Australia is borrowing $100 million a day.

The ABC, bless their hearts, fact-checked this claim and found it was true ⁽¹⁾. In fact, they found Hockey had slightly under-stated it. Australia is borrowing $110 million a day using the Hockey formula of dividing the deficit ($40.362 billion as of December 2014) by 365 days which equals a tad over $110 million a day. At the time of the claim, the Australian Office of Financial Management reported Australia's gross debt at $350.734 billion.

These are big numbers. Big scary numbers which fit well with the LNP script to scare the bejesus out of the electorate ... you know, scare us with terrorism (Labor's fault), asylum seekers (Labor's fault), budget emergency (Labor's fault). Labor is all that is wrong with the world if you listen to the LNP MPs who sound more like Doomsday Parrots then members of parliament.

The ABC Fact Check then quotes Professor Jakob Madsen of Monash University who states, 'I think it's a bit alarmist'. You think? He then goes on to point out that measuring the deficit as a percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is a better measure of an economy's health. The deficit is 2.5% of GDP. Scary stuff that.

That means that GDP is 40 times the deficit. Hardly an emergency.

What it indicates is that in this society of 'lifters and leaners' (to quote one of Abbott's insightful three word slogans), there are some who could lift a tad more.

Numerous economists have been pointing out that Australia does not have a spending problem, but it does have a revenue problem. And that problem isn't because of a lack of sources of revenue, but a structural problem with its tax system that sees the lifters being at the lower end of the income spectrum while the upper end shirk their responsibilities ... are in effect, leaners. ABC Fact Check quotes Richard Robinson from BIS Shrapnel who succinctly sums it up, 'In my opinion, a large chunk of the revenue problem is due to large tax benefits to already wealthy people, with the largest of these being superannuation breaks, capital gains tax breaks and negative gearing'.

Hockey has extrapolated the fear-mongering further by claiming that by 2037 Australia's debt will reach a whopping $1 trillion ⁽²⁾. Another huge number. But what about GDP?

Australia's economy is growing at 2.7% per annum ⁽³⁾. This is around average for the last 20 years in which its growth generally ranged between around 1% to 5%. Erring on the side of the conservative, let's extrapolate this to 2037 using 2.7% as average (it's actually a tad under if anything). If Australia's economy continues to grow on average over the next 22 years as it did over the last 20, GDP will be $3 trillion by 2037. Around THREE TIMES the debt. Hardly a debt crises. By comparison, the United Kingdom's debt to GDP ratio is more than 90% and the United States is 71%. Australia's debt to GDP is the lowest in the OECD ⁽⁴⁾. At 30% or so, that is an enviable position.

Imagine having a mortage of $33,000 with a $100,000 income.

Would you panic?

No, of course not. You would make sure you were paying for it, but you wouldn't slash investments (spending) if it would cut into your revenue (income). That sort of policy is what's known as austerity ... and it is economic suicide.

LNP economics is one dimensional. It gives one side of the story while failing to consider other aspects. It fails to mention what bang we get for our buck. While some money is wasted, for instance the $1 billion a year on the illegal treatment and human rights abuses of asylum seekers ⁽⁵⁾, other money is well spent ... such as on infrastructure and tax concessions for the lower paid to increase their disposable income so they can spend it in order to help keep business afloat and increase consumer confidence.

If anything, Hockey's scare-mongering confirms one thing: Australia's economy is sound, strong and resilient. It is able to weather its current debt and deficit without attacking and demonising welfare or workers.

The Australia Institute released a paper in September 2014 that categorically shot down the LNP mantra about budget emergencies and all that fluff. At that time, Australia's debt was 13.8% of GDP ⁽⁶⁾. This report was signed by 63 of Australia's leading economists warning against austerity measures that had decimated European economies and which the LNP were willing to implement.

Where is the emergency? Well, I'm glad you asked. The emergency is in touted expenditure cuts. One of the reasons for Australia's decline in revenue is because of increases in unemployment as pointed out in the Australia Institute report. Only last week, Australia's unemployment reach 6.4% ⁽⁷⁾. The highest it has been in 10 years ... ironically, the last time it was this high, Australia's now Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, was Employment Minister. Coincidence? I think not.

We started with an ABC Fact Check so let's end on an ABC Fact Check. A few months after the 2013 election, Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen claimed the LNP doubled the deficit within eight months of being elected. ABC checked this out and found it to be true ⁽⁸⁾. Reasons for this included:

• axing the carbon price - $2.8 billion over four years. (Remember, 'axe the tax' - another of Abbott's mindless three word slogans which was factually incorrect as the carbon PRICE was not a tax if anyone took the time to read the legislation, particularly Section 100, subsection 11 which states, ' ... it is not a law imposing taxation within the meaning of Section 55 of the Constitution' ⁽⁹⁾. I encourage you to read it, it's a ripping good yarn).
• giving the Reserve Bank of Australia $8.8 billion
• immigration detention - $2.8 billion over four years (obviously understated given the later report mentioned above that found Australia is spending $1 billion per annum)
• land transport infrastructure program - $5.6 billion over four years
• Students First Package - $1.2 billion over four years.

There is no budget emergency in Australia. The 'emergency' is purely a work of political fiction to shore up confidence in the LNP and to discredit the Labor Party. It makes for an effective sound bite. It feeds the mindless three word slogans of Prime Minister Abbott.

There will be an emergency however, if the government fails to increase revenue by sourcing the wealthy and continues programs that cut jobs, pay and conditions for the lower paid ... those cuts will plummet Australia into recession which won't be good for the economy.

References

1. ABC News, 'Fact check: Hockey over-eggs 'borrowing $100 million a day' claim', 13 February 2015, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-02-13/hockey-100-million/6085378. Accessed 14 February 2015.

2. The Daily Telegraph, Andrew Carswell, 13 February 2015, 'Australia’s debt crisis is a staggering $1 trillion nightmare, http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national/australias-debt-crisis-is-a-staggering-1-trillion-nightmare/story-fnpn0zn5-1227217818739?nk=6381409c52c7ccad94a77deb7f404b1c. Accessed 14 February 2015.

3. The Sydney Morning Herald, Gareth Hutchens, 4 December 2014, 'Australia's economy is still growing, so why does it feel like we're struggling?, http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australias-economy-is-still-growing-so-why-does-it-feel-like-were-struggling-20141204-1200xg.html. Accessed 14 February 2015.

4. Central Intelligence Agency, The World Factbook, 'Country comparison: public debt', https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2186rank.html. Accessed 14 February 2015.

5. The Sydney Morning Herald, Sarah Whyte, 20 October 2014, 'Offshore detention centres: annual costs hit $1 billion, http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/offshore-detention-centres-annual-costs-hit-1-billion-20141020-118s6i.html. Accessed 14 February 2015.

6. The Australia Institute, Economists’ Statement on Commonwealth Budgetary and Economic Priorities, http://www.tai.org.au/content/economists%E2%80%99-statement-commonwealth-budgetary-and-economic-priorities. Accessed 14 February 2015.

7. The Sydney Morning Herald, Mark Kenny, Gareth Hutchins, 13 February 2015, 'Abbott government rocked as unemployment hits highest rate since 2002', http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/abbott-government-rocked-as-unemployment-hits-highest-rate-since-2002-20150213-13d9lr.html. Accessed 14 February 2015.

8. ABC News, 'Fact check: Has the Government doubled the budget deficit?', 10 June 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-05-06/has-the-government-doubled-the-budget-deficit/5423392. Accessed 14 February 2015.

9. Australian Government, ComLaw, 'Clean Energy Act 2011 (repealed)', http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/C2011A00131. Accessed 14 February 2015.

The rise of ISIS - Labor's fault?

Earlier this week, two men were arrested in Sydney for allegedly plotting a terrorist attack. The allegation is that they were in position of a $12 machete and a home-made video allegedly declaring their loyalty to Islamic State (ISIS) and their intention to kill a police officer.

Almost immediately, Prime Minister Abbott made a big deal about one of the men being an Iraqi refugee who had sought asylum in Australia. Apparently, the man had flown into Australia on a false passport.

Of course, this was Labor's fault ... so Abbott claimed.

As he does. As the entire LNP does. Their mantra, their modus operandi, if you are ever able to stomach one of their repetitive interviews is to (regardless of the question), bang on about how they 'stopped the boats', 'axed the tax' and ... I don't know ... something else. Either way, they come back to blaming Labor. They're like robots. Heard one LNP MP, heard them all. It's like listening to Bart Simpson. 'I didn't do it', Bart constantly exclaims. The LNP is the Bart Simpson of politics. Constantly stuffing up and constantly blaming others while repeating the same ol' same ol' over and over again.

But I digress. The Attorney-General, George Brandis spruiked from the 'blame Labor' band-wagon that Labor's immigration policies had caused the rise in domestic terrorism. Hmm ... one or two foiled incidents and it's all Labor's fault.

Well, Labor didn't cause ISIS or other terrorist groups.

ISIS was a direct result of the Coalition of the Willing illegally invading Iraq on the basis of a lie. Remember the Weapons of Mass Distraction lie? Sorry ... Weapons of Mass Destruction lie. Prime Minister John Howard, US sycophant, couldn't wait to send Australian troops into Iraq. Not the first lie in which he was happy to commit the Australian military. Remember the 'children overboard' lie and the Tampa crisis. All lies and crises invented for his popularity.

Prior to that, the Coalition of the Willing invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban were allegedly sheltering Al Qaeda who supposedly was responsible for 9/11. Maybe so. However, it didn't justify the indiscriminate bombing of civilians. Funnily enough, Saudi Arabia, good friend of the USA, was implicated in 9/11 yet they weren't invaded ... too much money and power? Let's just pick on a country with an Army that can't possibly compete with such sophisticated Western weaponry.

The invasion of Iraq and subsequent overthrow of former US-puppet, Saddam Hussein, directly gave rise to numerous sectarian groups vying for power. ISIS being one of them. Saudi Arabia also funds ISIS, yet remains a 'good friend' of the USA.

If Brandis is so concerned about terrorism, he should look at his own party. It was his party who blindly and slavishly followed simpleton US President, George W. Bush, into the illegal invasion against a country that was no threat to the US, Britain, Australia or any other member of the Coalition of the Willing. In addition, the LNP has proudly declared its support of Israel which continues its illegal occupation and war-crimes in Palestine. Both of these actions have contributed immensely to angst against the West. Brandis doesn't see this because it has to be all Labor's fault.

Apparently, if someone threatens Australia, or the US, or Britain, it's perfectly acceptable to bomb the crap out of people who had nothing to do with it. But, if said people decide they need to defend themselves against unprovoked Western aggression then its terrorism and god help their mortal souls. All bets are off as the West (USA, Israel and so on) unleashes 'shock and awe' on innocent people, killing thousands of civilians, with the obsequious LNP cravenly waving its 'Go you good thing' flag.

Then there was the LNP donation of a couple of Naval vessels to the Sri Lankan government, a known abuser of human rights, to hunt down anyone who dare escape the persecution. Go you good thing, LNP, we can't have people thinking they can run away from torture and execution now. What sort of message would that send? Well, it tells me that the LNP condones torture and execution ...

While Abbott was trying to link asylum seekers to terrorism (as his hero, John Howard, also did), the Human Rights Commission released a damning report into the human rights abuses being committed by the Australian government against asylum seekers whom they continue to imprison in the gulags of Manus Island and Nauru. Holding vulnerable, traumatised adults and children for years (without charge of any crime, mind) while depriving them of basic rights of freedom, education, decent accommodation, food and water.

Abbott, a former trainee priest and supposedly 'practicing' Christian, stated that he was proud of his treatment of asylum seekers and that the Human Rights Commission should thank Scott Morrison, another self-proclaimed Christian, for stopping the boats. Apparently that is all the policy was. Stop the boats. The ungrateful asylum seekers should be thankful they didn't drown at sea but have been left to experience the criminal abuse of the Australian government.  Praise the Lord for a Christian government! A government who is proud to physically, emotionally and spiritually abuse the world's most vulnerable while discouraging victims of war, torture and persecution to leave their persecutors and seek safety in a 'Christian' country.

It's time the LNP grew up, grew some cajones and took responsibility for their own abusive, aggressive and illegal actions instead of opportunistically exploiting world tragedy to bolster their polling by intimidating the Australian public through lies and fear campaigns ... and looking for any excuse to blame Labor or refugees. How low is it to demonise asylum seekers, the world's most vulnerable people, who have no voice and are unable to defend themselves against such lies and abuse.

The LNP is promoting Islamophobia, hate crimes and xenophobia while trying to claim they uphold family values and are defending Australia's security. Our security is not at threat. Our family values, however, are under direct threat by the immoral actions and fear-mongering of Abbott and his cronies.

Terrorism is not a result of asylum seekers ... it is a direct result of foreign policy and intervention, of backing despots, war-crimes and human rights abuses to further Western imperialism.

State-sanctioned murder of Chan & Sukumaran

The state-sanctioned murder of Andrew Chan & Myuran Sukumaran

Indonesia inches closer to its promise to execute Australian drug traffickers, Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran despite their appeals, pleas for clemency, requests from the Australian government and numerous human rights groups.

Indonesia has been practicing the death penalty since 1973 and reserves it for murder, terrorism, drug trafficking and genocide. It is enforced through firing squad, in which the accused criminal is blind-folded and stands or kneels before a squad of 12 armed executioners. Three of the 12 use live bullets, the other nine fire blanks. The practice is cruel and barbaric. Prisoners don't always die immediately. If they survive, the Commander issues another bullet and the prisoner is shot in the head. The prisoner and their family are given 72 hours notice of the impending execution.

The government believes it is sending a strong message and a deterrent to would be criminals. Without doubt, there would be some who would think twice about trafficking in Indonesia, yet the country has one of the highest rates of drug abuse in Asia and claims 50 people a day die from drug abuse. Clearly, the death penalty is not the deterrent the Indonesian government believes it is.

Victorian Supreme Court judge, Justice Lex Lasry told ABC's 7.30 Report on 11 February 2015, 'I don't believe there are any circumstances at all in which governments should take men or women out and kill them. We must be surely getting past the point where governments regard killing as a legitimate punishment. There are all sorts of other punishments - life imprisonment and so on - but the idea that a government would take individuals out into the bush, as they would here, and shoot them is just something that I can never live with and never understand, and apart from anything else, from a legal point of view, no-one really claims now that it has any real deterrent value. It's just a terrible thing to do'. ⁽¹⁾

The legality of the death penalty was challenged in 2007 but the Indonesian Constitutional Court declared it was constitutional.

The current round of state-sanctioned murders is purely political. President Joko Widodo was only elected in October 2014 in a close fought election. It had been two years since an execution, but almost immediately after the election, Widodo proceeded with executions of prisoners on death row. Six faced the firing squad in January 2015; all had been convicted of drug crimes. Former Labor Foreign Minister, Gareth Evans summed it perfectly when he said that Widodo was 'trying to demonstrate his cajones, his testosterone'. ⁽²⁾

The President is adamant that Chan and Sukumaran will be executed in February 2015 despite their pleas, despite their rehabilitation. Both men have contributed immensely to the well-being, education and rehabilitation of other inmates. Sukumaran studied art under the mentorship of Melbourne artist, Ben Quilty. He continues painting and has even sold some of his paintings to raise money for other inmates, such as Maria Cecilia Lopez who needed $4,000 for an operation on a tumour. Both Chan and Sukumaran have been actively involved in drug rehabilitation programs in prison, providing assistance, guidance and inspiration to other prisoners. Chan has become a Christian pastor and leads church services.

The Australian Federal Police are complicit in the deaths of Chan and Sukumaran. They were aware of the 2006 drug trafficking operation and could have arrested Chan, Sukumaran and the other members of the 'Bali 9' before they even left Australia. The AFP was well aware of the fate that awaited traffickers in Indonesia, yet they chose to let the nine travel to Bali for the operation before informing Indonesian authorities. The AFP has blood on its hands.

Some have argued that the men deserve to die because the drugs could have killed innocent people in Australia. A shallow argument. People aren't forced to use drugs. They use them because they choose them. No-one would have stopped using drugs because of the failed Bali 9 operation. Drug users, and their parents, need to take responsibility for their own actions and not blame others. The drug industry faces the same economic laws as every other industry. Namely, supply and demand. If the demand isn't there, there won't be supply. Contrary to what some believe, dealers are not nefariously aiming to increase supply by 'getting others hooked'. People choose to use drugs. Killing their traffickers does not stop or change this.

More importantly, killing the mules doesn't change this. The drug lords aren't the ones getting caught. They continue living in luxury looking for other mules to take the risk. This includes the man suspected of being the drug lord that Chan and Sukumaran were mules for. If reports are to be believed, he is living in luxury in Sydney ⁽³⁾. As we often see when it comes to the law, it's the ordinary person who pays the price while the wealthy get away scot-free.

Facing a firing squad is a high price to pay for politicians wanting popularity, to demonstrate their 'cajones', for a failed policy and for a stupid mistake the men made and admit to. They haven't denied trafficking and don't deny they should be punished. Life in prison would be preferable to death. It would also be more productive. They have touched the lives of many in prison and would have positive influence on many others over the coming years.

And it's not just about Chan and Sukumaran. No-one, regardless of the crime, should be executed. The death penalty is state-sanctioned murder, whether it's in Indonesia, the United States or any other country.

References

1. ABC, 7.30 Report, Leigh Sales, 11 February 2015, Supreme Court judge Lex Lasry calls for clemency for Bali 9 duo, http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2015/s4178320.htm. Accessed 12 February 2015.

2. Brisbane Times, Deborah Snow, 11 February 2015, 'Bob Carr calls on AFP to explain themselves over Bali Nine'. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/bob-carr-calls-on-afp-to-explain-themselves-over-bali-nine-20150211-13c3ax.html. Accessed 12 February 2015.

3. Sydney Morning Herald, Nick Mckenzie, Richard Baker, Michael Bachelard, 11 February 2015, 'Suspected Bali Nine mastermind living in luxury as Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran sit on death row', http://www.smh.com.au/national/suspected-bali-nine-mastermind-living-in-luxury-as-andrew-chan-and-myuran-sukumaran-sit-on-death-row-20150211-13aypt.html. Accessed 12 February 2015.

Linked article

• Post-script to the state-sanctioned murder of Chan and Sukumaran - published 3 May 2015

Charlie Hebdo - Many speak, few listen

The massacre in the offices of French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, was a tragedy. Twelve people were murdered and eleven injured when three masked gunman burst into the office and fired on them. Two days later the perpetrators were killed by police, following another siege. Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) claimed responsibility for the attack on Charlie Hebdo. ⁽¹⁾

Charlie Hebdo has courted controversy because it often publishes offensive cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad. For a number of years, the offices and some of its employees have been guarded by police because the depictions of Muhammad have infuriated many Muslims, with some threatening violent retaliation. On 7 January 2015 that retaliation came in the most tragic of ways. The surviving staff of Charlie Hebdo have sworn to keep the magazine open and to continue publishing its acerbic satire regardless of who it offends.

Interestingly, Charlie Hebdo was happy to offend Muslims but not to offend Jews so much. Charlie Hebdo is taking the 'freedom of speech' high ground over this attack ... but in 2008 the magazine sacked cartoonist Maurice Sinet for anti-Semitism after he made a jibe at French President Sarkozy's son ⁽²⁾. There are two things with this. Firstly, attacking Islam and Muslims is apparently fair game while criticising a politician marrying into a Jewish family isn't. Secondly, it's ok to offend those who have no political power, those who are the fodder in the West's war on terror or the victims of Israel's genocidal policies, but it's not ok to criticise someone with influence. Politicians are constantly the victims of satire and criticism, including Mr Sarkozy. The only reason Sinet was sacked was because his satire dared to ridicule Jews based on a common stereotype. How is that different to the magazine's depictions of Islam? The only difference is that it is probably less offensive, in that it didn't use sexual or perverted imagery. Yet Sinet was sacked.

The attack on Charlie Hebdo is being labelled an attack on freedom of speech. Without doubt, there are less violent ways to resolve issues with those who cause offense. Freedom of speech means that there will always be someone who is willing to push the boundaries of decency and respect. That doesn't mean they deserve to die.

Voltaire once stated 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'.

The attack was followed by an outpouring of anger, sympathy and solidarity for freedom of expression. Twitter was rife with #JeSuisCharlie (I Am Charlie) as people expressed solidarity with the victims. Not all who condemned the attack agreed with Charlie Hebdo's satire, but they were willing to defend its right to freedom of expression.

A free and just society should defend freedom of speech, however, this freedom is a two-edged sword. One person's opinion may offend another. But the other may also say things considered offensive. If we ban speech, where is the line drawn. It is a two-edged sword but one that must exist.

In Australia, freedom of speech came to a head in 2014 when the government considered repealing Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act which makes it unlawful for a person to act in a way that is likely to 'offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or group' based on 'race, colour or national or ethnic origin'. ⁽³⁾ Many on the right-wing saw this as left-wing, do-gooder, political correctness. The Attorney General, George Brandis, supported repealing 18C and stated that 'people have the right to be bigots'. I agree with him. People do have a right to voice their opinions and this includes the opinions of bigots who, sadly, walk among us still ... even in the more enlightened 21st century. This doesn't mean that offensive comments and behaviour isn't illegal under a host of other laws, such as defamation or incitement to violence.

While Brandis is happy to defend bigots, the conservative government he belongs to wages war on the publicly owned ABC and SBS networks because they don't always give favourable scrutiny to the government, it's policies or even of Australia's actions. Abbott even claimed the ABC took everyone else's side except Australia's when it was covering a story of allegations of abuse of asylum seekers by the Royal Australian Navy ⁽⁴⁾. Why should it take Australia's side? It's there to report news and make comment (remember, freedom of speech). There should be no 'sides' when it comes to revealing abuse, corruption and criminal behaviour.

The Charlie Hebdo massacre played into the hands of Islamophobes the world over. They predictably blamed all Muslims, blamed the Koran, blamed Islam. Some of these comments came from Christian pastors as if their own religions, creeds, politics or nations aren't guilty of encouraging racism, xenophobia and violence. Grenades were thrown at a mosque in France, a Muslim prayer hall was fired upon and a kebab shop was firebombed.⁽⁵⁾

The Islamophobes seem to have not realised that one of the victims of the Charlie Hebdo massacre was a Muslim. In fact, this particular Muslim, Ahmed Merabet, was a police officer tasked with guarding the offices of Charlie Hebdo; the magazine that regularly attacked his Prophet with some of the most vile imagery and suggestion. Ahmed died protecting the free speech of a magazine that regularly ridiculed and deliberately offended his religion. ⁽⁶⁾ News of Ahmed's sacrifice was followed by many tweeting #JeSuisAhmed, in support of his selfless actions.

To argue that Islam is opposed to freedom of speech ignores the fact that in his lifetime, the Prophet Muhammad, was subject to abuse and torment. He didn't respond violently. He called his followers to show love and compassion. When was the last time a Muslim country invaded a Western one? Centuries ago. For at least the last 200 years, almost all invasions and incursions have been perpetrated by Western nations, and often into Muslim lands. But its easy for the West to pick on its victims when it fails to show empathy.

One of the problems with racist satire is that it reinforces stereotypes in the mind of the easily led and it erodes empathy for others. This lack of empathy means that most Islamophobes have no understanding of the terror that their nations have inflicted on Muslim countries and people, nor do they care.

The media doesn't help with unbalanced reporting.  Some media reported the Charlie Hebdo attack as the first terrorist attack in Europe since 2005. Apparently, they forgot about Christian terrorist, Anders Breivik going on a bombing and shooting spree that killed 77 people in Norway. Breivik wrote a manifesto in which he demanded the deportation of Muslims from Europe and annihilation of Marxists and multicultralism. His was a terrorist attack. He was a Christian. Where was the outrage from those who rise up every time a Muslim kills an innocent? When terrorists kill in the name Islam, Muslims quickly condemn them, Imams speak out against them. Where was the outrage in the church after Anders Breivik killed in the name of God and an ideology embraced by many Christians?

The day before the Charlie Hebdo massacre, a bombing occurred in the United States at the office of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). It received very little coverage. ⁽⁷⁾ Those who were offended by the lack of coverage hit Twitter with #NAACPbombing to bring attention to it. Had Muslims been responsible it would have been international news and no doubt followed by a Twitterstorm of Islamophobic hashtags.

It seems that people have either forgotten, or chosen to ignore, the West's attacks on the media. Before Muslims were attacking Charlie Hebdo, NATO bombed Tanjung, a state-run Serbian television station, killing 10 people and injuring 18. NATO justified it by claiming it ran propaganda from Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic who would later be charged with crimes against humanity. Whatever the justification, the building contained 150 civilians, a number of whom were killed in the attack. ⁽⁸⁾

In 2001, the United States bombed the offices of Middle Eastern journalism giant, Al Jazeera in Kabul, killing one employee and injuring another. The USA claimed it was accidental, however Al Jazeera claims that US forces were well aware of its location. ⁽⁹⁾

In 2003, the US again attacked Al Jazeera. This time in Baghdad, killing one and injuring another. ⁽¹⁰⁾

In 2005, reports emerged of a leaked memo between then US President George W. Bush and then UK Prime Minister, Tony Blair, which indicated Bush's intention to bomb Al Jazeera's headquarters in Qatar. ⁽¹¹⁾ Blair thankfully talked Bush out of it.

The attacks on Al Jazeera were because America felt that their's was the only version of events that should be published. Al Jazeera on the other hand, felt that they shouldn't bend to western propaganda and instead published views and facts that were devoid of undue influence from the USA.

In 2008, Israel deliberately killed a Palestinian journalist in Gaza ⁽¹²⁾. In the 2012, Israel bombed the Russian TV office of Rusiya Al-Yaum in Gaza during its horrendous bombing campaign⁽¹³⁾. In 2014 Israel waged a genocidal attack on Gaza in which more 2,000 people were killed, most of whom were civilians⁽¹⁴⁾. During that war, Israel killed 17 journalists ⁽¹⁵⁾, yet hypocritically bemoans the Charlie Hebdo murders.

In 2014, a number of US networks sacked journalists who failed to support Israel and dared to show empathy for the Palestinians who were at that time being bombed incessantly by Israel. ⁽¹⁶⁾ The US and its media giants only like freedom of speech when it favours them, their policies or their allies.

Freedom of speech cuts both ways, as does condemnation. Quite rightly, the Charlie Hebdo attack was condemned across the globe. Contrary to what some have said, Muslims across the globe have also condemned the attack ^{(17) (18)}.

Muslims are in the middle, attacked by extremists abusing their religion, while bearing the brunt of the world's derision.

Muslims in the Middle ⁽¹⁶⁾

If we're going to claim that the attack on Charlie Hebdo was an attack on freedom of speech, then we must condemn all other attacks on freedom of speech. Including the attacks on Al Jazeera and other media by NATO, US and Israel.

The only 'side' we should take is against terrorism, against attacks on innocent people. We should not emulate Prime Minister Tony Abbott's belief that the media should side with Australia regardless of what laws or atrocities have been committed. G.K. Chesteron once stated, "My country right or wrong" is a thing that no patriot would think of saying except in a desperate case. It is like saying "my mother, drunk or sober".

Freedom of speech includes freedom to criticise or roundly condemn what is said. That is not an attack on freedom, if anything it is an exercise in freedom. Being able to speak freely, to write freely, should help each of us be more circumspect in our beliefs and in our actions if we can truly listen to what is being sad, if we can challenge ourselves and what is written to help identify the truth whether it be through satire or biting political commentary. Shakespeare wrote 'Jesters oft prove prophets' otherwise meaning 'the truth is often spoken in jest'. The world has much to learn about itself, to learn why people resort to terrorism, why people are angry, why war in the name of anything is wrong, whether it be religion, democracy, drugs or whatever else. Violence begets violence, hatred begets hatred.

Is anyone listening to the voice of the people, of the victims?

While many are willing to express their freedom of speech they aren't so willing to express their freedom to listen and to learn.

Many speak, Few listen.


References

1. Al Jazeera, 'Deadly end to sieges', 10 January 2015, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2015/01/hostages-dead-as-french-police-end-two-sieges-20151917917890998.html, accessed 10 January 2015.

2. New York Times, Basil Katz, 'A scooter, a Sarkozy and Rancor collide', 5 August 2008, http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/05/world/europe/05france.html. Accessed 10 January 2015.

3. Australian Government, Commonwealth Consolidated Acts, Racial Discrimination Act 1975 - Sect 18C, http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/s18c.html. Accessed 10 January 2105.

4. ABC News, Latika Bourke, 'Prime Minister Tony Abbott says ABC not on Australia's side in interview with 2GB', 4 February 2014, http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-01-29/tony-abbott-steps-up-criticism-of-abc/5224676. Accessed 10 January 2015.

5. The Telegraph, 'Paris shootings lead to firebomb attacks on French mosques', 8 January 2015, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/11332467/Paris-shootings-lead-to-firebomb-attacks-on-French-mosques.html. Accessed 8 January 2015.

6. World.Mic, Sophie Kleeman, '#JeSuisAhmed Reveals the Hero of the Paris Shooting Everyone Needs to Know', 8 January 2015, http://mic.com/articles/107988/the-hero-of-the-charlie-hebdo-shooting-we-re-overlooking. Accessed 9 January 2015.

7. Daily Kos, Shaun King, 'Frustrated by lack of mainstream media coverage, #NAACPBombing hashtag goes viral', 7 January 2015, http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/07/1356085/-Frustrated-by-lack-of-mainstream-media-coverage-NAACPBombing-hashtag-goes-viral. Accessed 9 January 2015.

8. The Guardian, Richard Norton-Taylor, 'Serb TV station was legitimate target, says Blair', 24 April 1999, http://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/apr/24/balkans3. Accessed 8 January 2015.

9. The Guardian, Matt Wells, 'Al-Jazeera accuses US of bombing its Kabul office', 17 November 2001, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2001/nov/17/warinafghanistan2001.afghanistan, Accessed 8 January 2015.

10. BBC News, 'Al-Jazeera hit by missile', 8 April 2003, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2927527.stm. Accessed 8 January 2015.

11. The Guardian, Dominic Timms, 'Al-Jazeera seeks answers over 'bombing' memo', 23 November 2005, http://www.theguardian.com/media/2005/nov/23/iraq.iraqandthemedia. Accessed 8 January 2015.

12. The Electronic Intifida, Palestinian Center for Human Rights, 'Israel forces in Gaza "willfully kill" journalist', 17 April 2008, http://electronicintifada.net/content/israeli-forces-gaza-willfully-kill-journalist/3347. Accessed 10 January 2015.

13. Sputnik International, 'Israel Airstrike Destroys Russia Today TV Channel's Gaza Office', 16 September 2012, http://sputniknews.com/world/20121118/177566787.html. Accessed 8 January 2015.

14. Amnesty International, 'Families Under the Rubble - Israeli attacks on inhabited homes', November 2014, http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/MDE15/032/2014/en/613926df-68c4-47bb-b587-00975f014e4b/mde150322014en.pdf. Accessed 10 January 2014.

15. Counter Current News, M.B. David, 'These 17 Journalists Were Killed by Israel', 29 August 2014, http://countercurrentnews.com/2014/08/these-17-journalists-were-killed-by-israel-in-gaza/. Accessed 10 January 2014.

16. World Socialist Web Site, Barry Grey, 'US networks remove reporters critical of Israeli attack on Gaza', http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/07/19/medi-j19.html. Accessed 8 January 2015.

17. On Islam, by Shari 'ah staff, 'How Muslim Scholars View Paris attack (in-depth)', 8 January 2015, http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/special-coverage/481653-paris-attack-charlie-hebdo-terrorist-cartoon.html. Accessed 8 January 2015.

18. Huffington Post, Jaweed Kaleem, 'Why Muslims Are Talking About Islam And Blasphemy After Charlie Hebdo', 7 January 2015, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/01/07/charlie-hebdo-muslims-blasphemy_n_6433104.html. Accessed 9 January 2015.

19. Khalid Albaih, (@khalidalbaih), Al Jazeera, 'Cartoonists react to Charlie Hebdo Attack', 7 January 2015, http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2015/01/cartoonists-react-charlie-hebdo-attack-201517171624156381.html. Accessed 10 January 2015.