All Activity

The uncontrolled immigration started under Malcolm Fraser and a Liberal Govt in 1976, when he let "refugees" from Lebanons civil war into Australia with inadequate background checks - against Immigration laws and regulations and against the advice of the Immigration Dept. It was called "The Lebanon Concession". "The Lebanon Concession" was an Australian immigration policy introduced in 1976 by Malcolm Fraser's government that temporarily relaxed standard migration criteria for thousands of Lebanese civilians fleeing the country's civil war. The policy allowed many Lebanese nationals - often categorized as "quasi-refugees" because they were escaping civil conflict rather than direct state persecution - to enter Australia without the usual requirements for employment skills, language, or assimilation ability. Implemented in response to advocacy by influential Christian leaders and the worsening humanitarian situation, the policy resulted in the arrival of roughly 20,000 Lebanese immigrants between 1975 and 1980. Prior to the concession, Australia's Lebanese community was predominantly Christian. The relaxed criteria inadvertently facilitated the arrival of a significant number of Muslim Lebanese from rural backgrounds, who made up just under half of the arrivals. Many of these new migrants settled in south-western Sydney (such as Lakemba and Arncliffe), utilizing family reunion provisions in later years to establish a major, enduring community. The Fraser government abandoned the concession in late 1976 after immigration officials raised concerns that many entrants were illiterate, and admitted without sufficient regard to "economic viability, personal qualities, or capacity for successful settlement". What is not stated that a large percentage of these Lebanese immigrants were criminals.

Perhaps it is becasue people think that the system is out of control. There are so many thngs impacting on us that cannot be controlled by ourselves, or by politicians. People must be thinking that since the place is going to Hell in a handbasket, it must be the fault of our traditional leaders from both sides. Therefore they decide to give the non-traditional a go.

Talking about perceptions, my perception is that the federal government is the worst we have had in my lifetime. And that includes Whitlam, who I had voted for. Each of us has our perception based on what we see and read; we draw our own conclusions based on experience. I don't mind people having an opposite perception, it just means that I disagree with them. I don't have to shout at them or be rude.

For your information Nev, the Redbridge group poll showed a better result for One Nation and a worse result for Labor than the Newspoll. So who's Redbridge's Director of Strategy and Analytics? It's Kos Samaras, former Victorian Labor strategist. Murdoch and Sky, crikey Nev, wake up to yourself. You're so blinkered you're becoming delusional.

Nev, look up the other polls that are having the same results. Find out who are the directors and researchers, analysts. Learn something insted of ranting crap.

Nev, your'e an F'n idiot. Don't accuse me of that shit and you owe me an apology dude. I'm quoting profesional polls, ones that Labor use as well as everyone else. They are run by people, some of them former Labor professionals. They are qualified people. I'm not quoting Sky or Murdoch you clown.

I'm trying not to fall into the habit with Google of just reading the top section only which is the AI response to the question. The reason being it can be quite misleading. Like Wikiedia, it's not gospel and is all about the source reference. I Googled a question yesterday and the two answers AI came up with were just posts harvested from a Facebook group. What AI was saying was just what some bloke on a FB group said about the subject. It might well have been true, but not a reliable reference source in my opinion. Wikipedia can have the same issues. Sometimes the reference, if the reader bothers to check it, can be just a newspaper article and a journalists opinion only and not established fact.

One Nation won't do that, it would be a grave mistake. But if they do, I'll stop supporting ON

It's the Coalition that's in dire trouble. Now THEY are talking about amalgamating with PHON. The Greens are in trouble internally. People aren't deserting Labor. Stop reading Sky and Murdoch LIES and find out what's really happening, wille. Yes Hanson is on a roll but if she's the ANSWER just what is the Question? She will be doing WHAT Murdoch and Gina want. Newspoll is Murdoch and not that reliable, either. You don't know just what questions were askedin the survey. Overseas opinion of the Australian Gov't's Performance is very different from HOW is Portrayed by the MSM Here. Nev

We need a big beautiful consumer affairs department, bigger than we've ever seen, and the consumers must come first. I just received two power bills from two different providers, for the same billing period. Five phone calls later, it still hasn't been resolved, each provider is blaming each other, and again, I'm having to make sense of Indians' gobbilldy English on the other end of the phone. When will we ever get a break?

The latest Newspoll is a shocker for the Coalition, down two points to 18%. Two points is probably within the margin of error, but the overall figure for them must be scary being below 20% primary support. Labor is down to 30%, their worst since the Gillard days. The Greens must feel comfortable. They don't have big support but the support they have barely moves. They're quite immune from all the recent political upheaval.

Yes, there's two different groups of voters there. There's the conservative side that have and will always have a basic philosophical difference to the left. Then there's the swinging voters who are now swinging away from the government. For them being former Labor voters, it must be policy or a perception the country is heading in the wrong direction that's changed their voting intention. I'd have to re-read some of the recent polls, but on the question of whether the country is heading in the right direction, I think it's around two out of three think it's not.

One thing about Australia is that we have a political system that should work with more emphasis on representation and policy. It's designed that way, but in reality has become very presidential. Often the popularity of the leader and his/her immediate cohort can influence the voting public a lot. Look at all the leadership coups we've seen over recent years. A party won't change policy that much but they think if they bump off the leader their poll figures will bounce back. In a perfect world, the leader shouldn't matter that much, it's the policy that counts. My tip is Albo will get rolled by next year if they can't turn the slide around. They've stuck with him only because he's won two elections, or in reality, the other side threw them away. Morrison and Dutton, say no more. But if it starts to look like Albo can't win a third they'll push him out in a heartbeat.

Mass uncontrolled immigration for a start. Ethnic drug lords rule in Sydney.

Not everyone sees it or perceives it as you do Marty. There will always be two ways to look at it. That's why we have two sides of politics and governments change.

Which I don't really understand. I'd be interested to know which policies in particular people are having a problem with. From my perspective they could do better in a few areas, but overall they're doing a good job.

Also Marty, if you think about it, if enough people thought we had competent government making decisions in the best interest of the people, Labor's opinion polling figures wouldn't be at an historic low and still on a downward direction.

Problem is Marty, the polls are showing us that an increasing amount of people think we've already got that.

I seem to remember that's why Trump (and brexit) happened. The risk being, of course, that your protest vote leads to an incompetent government, and / or one that doesn't make decisions in the best interest of the people.

I thought that big fat grub, Clive Palmer, had disappeared off the political scene, with my unreliable memory recalling that he said he was done with politics at the last election, where his party got hammered. But this morning, I got a flyer in the letterbox from Clives Party, like they're on the campaign trail again? Turns out, he's re-registered the United Australia Party again, after burying his Trumpet of Patriots Party unceremoniously, so he IS on the campaign trail again. He's talking about spending billions on advertising, to ensure he wins the next election. He obviously believes his money can buy every Australian, same as it does in America. I've got some news for him, he may waste a lot of his money again to achieve very little again, politically.

A circuit breaker is a very important thing in a circuit, but it doesn't do the work the circuit is meant to do.

And there's the rub for the government. Increasingly less and less people think they are providing wise governance. What's behind the swing to One Nation is that a lot of people are increasingly feeling like the government and opposition have failed badly and they've had enough and want a circuit breaker. It's like a mild form of anarchy; tear down the house and start again type of mood.

It won't happen again is a pretty good bet. They found enough skullduggery surrounding the Last Happening involving the Royals. Nev

Don't worry ome, you're not the first person on this forum to say ON has no policies without going on to their website to read them. A lot of assumptions get thrown about on this forum, it's just the nature of it and we all do it at times.

Thanks for bringing me up to date.