Albo & Co.

[facthunter]

#1 is the only place that counts.  Nev

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yep, they really are corrupt. When you need millions to contest an election, then of course you will be beholden to your financiers.

I wish we could do much better here.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Well, here's something that Albos has got spot on: https://www.theage.com.au/technology/federal-government-examining-new-medicare-numbers-for-people-affected-by-optus-breach-20220928-p5bliq.html

 

I can't believe how far behind Australia is with data protection laws. They could lift and shift the European GDPR and it would work.. What I like over the GDPR, though, is Albanese is effectively saying, "You have a data breach? Well, you pay for remediating the risk to those you caused a breach to." That is very differnt to a fine, which is finite. It would mean every corporation in Aus would not only strenghten their info and cybersecurity (I read the breach at Optus was because their systems were simply neglected from a cyber/info security persective - though I am not sure I believe it), but, as the potential restorative costs would far exceed a fine, they would work bloody hard to make sure it never happens.

 

If it happens, well done, Albo!

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[old man emu]

4 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I can't believe how far behind Australia is with data protection laws.

In an interview on TV, the Minister for Cyber Security in the Albanese Government upped the ante when the interviewer asked where Australia was in terms of private and government cyber security. It was a pleasant change to hear a Government Minister say that we were at minimum 5 years behind the rest of the World in our standard of security, and ten years behind in cyber security Law.  Then she blatantly stated that the Government's cyber security was NUTS - Not Up To Standard.

 

Was I watching reality TV, or a new politico-drama?

[facthunter]

I can understand you being startled. Truth at last.. I've never been of the belief that they are ALL bad but when deception seems to work on such a large scale, it's depressing to those of us who hope for better. Nev.

[Bruce Tuncks]

Why oh why don't we vote dud pollies out more? I reckon the "safe seat" is the worst thing ever invented .

We should be very intolerant of corruption in particular. On both sides.

[facthunter]

The SAFE SEAT is the LHS up the front. At least up there,  you have a fighting chance.  Nev

[Marty_d]

10 hours ago, facthunter said:

The SAFE SEAT is the LHS up the front. At least up there,  you have a fighting chance.  Nev

Unless you're in a car, of course.  

[facthunter]

Not many safe seats there. Friedhamburger had the safest Liberal seat in Australia,  THAT didn't count for much in the end.  Nev

Edited September 30, 2022 by facthunter

[willedoo]

I remember when Joh was premier of Queensland and people (press included) said the government was only there because of the gerrymander that a previous Labor government had introduced many years before. Naturally, Joh tweaked it a bit to make themselves a bit more of a sure thing. Many said we'd never get rid of Joh and the Nats while the gerrymander was in place. But it happened, they got booted out under the gerrymandered electoral boundaries. All you need is enough people to vote against them. Same goes for any so called safe seat.

[Yenn]

Joh had reached his use by date and was seen to be corrupt, plus he was closely working with Russ Hinze, the minister for everything. He slipped up by allowing another pollie to push him out. Something he never thought would happen.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Back to Albo & Co... Joh is so yesterday, dahleengs

 

This YT video is itneresting. Most people think a lot of the YT activist journo types are just fronts for Labor.. not this fella..

 

Reality is politics is politics. The climb of the greasy pole to the top is riddled with paybacks; and of course, there are probably a few skeletons to be kept hidden... And there is some other bargaining chip as well..

 

Either way, according to a swollen pickle (which apparently is a brand name for some acoustic equipment), Albo - you sometimes need to lift your game (of which I would also say about buying US subs in rather than building them.. I am sure we could get a better deal from the French or the Brits):

 

 

 

Edited October 2, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

OK... not strictly Albo related, so let's widen this thread to the Labour Government's performance. Generally. it seems to have been pretty good, from what I have seen. There are blips - yes.. For example, they seem not to be averse to fossil fuield development as their pre-election spin may have led us to believe.

 

But on anti-corruption - the (or my) jury is out.. because of the secret hearings. where public hearings would be the outlier. Er.. whistleblowers and secret hearings, etc.. it stinks. To me, it is a bet each way.. a tacit admission that, "well some of us may fall foul of the rules, so we don't want our dirty laundry aired, either". I know when Gladys, who seems to be loved by Fairfax, was investigated, it was hailed as a witch hunt and not the right time.. WTF? Justice should stop for a whiney Murdoch and Costello premier and her maladminstration fo COVID? FFS!

 

As this bloke says, for over 100 years we are used to hearings in public. Why should pollies be afforded protection of secret hearings? For outliers of *genuine* national security - yes, but the run of the mill corruption - public hearing please! Note, as I undrestand, courts hearings are not televised, and ICAC/IBAC, etc should probably also not be televised. But public, they should be.

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

OK.. As I understand, Albo has come under pressure for bullying a female MP by answering a question... Looks like, the left are at their old tricks.. or are they?

 

I like this independent commentator... He is one of three I back on Patreon. And for good reason:

Edited November 2, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[spacesailor]

Perhapse his ' hearing aid ' batteries went flat. 

spacesailor

[Old Koreelah]

My respect for that woman has evaporated; very selective in her outrage, seemed to be quite dishonest about her actual reaction. 

 

But that matters little; the damage is done, because most of us don’t delve thru the BS to get at the truth.

[facthunter]

It's a frame up and anyone with eyes can see it. Dutton can't stand being beaten by Albanese at Question time.  Actually it's  Misleading the Parliament DELIBERATELY when it's broadcast nationwide. Albanese at no time was addressing Michelle Landry in a derogatory way and she like many others thought it was a bit of a joke . Albos shot was squarely aimed at Duttons INTERJECTIONS and only corrected his errors..Nev

[old man emu]

Dutton's interjections prevented the Prime Minister to answer what seemed to be a reasonable question, but one clearly aimed at scoring a political point in the form of "You said you would, but you haven't." Then the PM informed Parliament that for one thing, the environmental impact study had not been delivered. That study would be the lyrics the Fat Lady would have to sing before a sod was turned.

[red750]

Closed captions today had Albanese as "Albany see". 

[facthunter]

Surely that type of name calling is "childish"? Sco Mo is what Morrison called himself because he worked out it would appeal to young people. . He hated "Scotty FROM Marketing". Nev

[old man emu]

45 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Sco Mo is what Morrison called himself because he worked out it would appeal to young people.

Yet another marketing failure.

[facthunter]

Barnaby mispronounces Anthony's name deliberately (I think). Nev

[red750]

Either it's the speakers pronunciation, or the AI voice to text is crap. As I have said in the other thread, captions are OK on pre-recorded programs, where they have time to get them correct, and often ahead of the speach, but live to air they are way behind, and horribly inaccurate. Approximately one error every three lines. Like some of the posts on this forum, you have to work out what they should have said, while trying to keep up.

[Jerry_Atrick]

A couple of interesting decisions from the Dept of Health this week, courtesy of Mark Butler. The first is to require a referral for a PCR test. I understand that they aren't too cheap, but the pandemic is still in play, and LFTs are not that accutate. Surely it would be better to have access to PCRs on presentation of a negative LFT (which can be disposed of at the sites where PCRs are conducted) than require a referral by a GP. As I understand GP's time is us becoming a rarer commodity so, given the still high-ish rates of infection, it would not be a great application of time. And what about exposing people to the potential of the virus as one sits in the waiting room, waiting to see the GP and get a referral?

 

Of course, the systtem may be designed to discourage people to take the PCRs, but isn't the number of infections on the rise, again? Yes, we have a largely vaccinated population. However, Australia has now had 16,492 deaths from Covid (https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=covid+infections+australia) and most of them would have come after lockdowns ceased.

 

The second interesting one, which is probably worse, is reverting back to 10 subsidised pschological sessions from 20, introduced for the pandemic. This is despite a review recommending the original 20 remain, with an assessment after 10 sessions. The reason given was that it exacerbates wait times in rural and lower-socio economic areas. There may be some truth in it, but in reality, access to these services provided privately and subsidised is always going to be tough in these areas as there isn't the same money in it as wealthier urban areas, especially in professions which contol the barriers to entry.

 

The reason why reducing access to subsidised psychological sessions is perplexing is that, quite apart from the bouts of stress we all suffer from time to time, which is healthy, there is a pandemic in acute and chronic forms of mental illness ranging from anxiety, to depression, to bi-polar as well as the pyschosis based issues. In other words, the problem is going to get worse, not better.

 

Obviously, it is better to fund attacking the root causes, but there has to be support in the mean time, and is even 20 subsidised appointments enough for those who need it? Of course, it costs money - I get it. But I don't heat Albo & Co. saying anything about removing Fossil Fuels subsidies, or levelling the tax field so these big multi-nationals pay their fair share of tax so these services can be afforded? Unliek the auto-manufacturing industries, these other industreis make profits and will not leave the country if they have to pay their fair share of tax. Yeah, they will grumble, and yeah, there isa good possibility that super funds may take a hit as they are probably invested well in tax-free industries. 

[old man emu]

I'm going to really go off now.

 

4 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

The first is to require a referral for a PCR test.

Last night I came down with something that made me feel like I was a Death's door. Only ever having a true case of the 'flu once, years ago, What I had - shivers, pain in the joints, woozy headache - made me think I at least had the 'flu, or worse still, COVID. I didn't do a RAT for fear that it would be +ve. So I went to bed and woke up a few hours later feeling really hot. For the sake of brevity, which is a God-given thing, I did a RAT this morning and it was -ve. 

 

If the test had been +ve, where would I find a doctor in a country town to give me a referral? They don't exist, and if they do, they don't take walk-ins. An option would have been to drag myself into Dubbo, 75 kms away, but based on a self-assessment, I would not consider myself in a proper physical condition to operate a motor vehicle on a highway. And with what certainty would I have been able to see a doctor there? 

 

4 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

reverting back to 10 subsidised psychological sessions from 20,

Oh! Poor poor snake oil salesmen. My heart bleeds for them. It's pseudo-medical area, populated by flim-flammers. Why do I say that?

 

In 2006 I was discharged "medically unfit" due to "anxiety and depression". Sixteen years later - which is more than half the number of years I was in that career, I still carry that stigma of "depression". Every year I have to note that on my driver's medical, and now that I'm chasing a Part 61 licence to return to flying, how am I going to convince CASA that I'm not a mentally deranged risk to aviation safety?

 

So I thought I would ask a psychologist for an assessment - something the the doctors I regularly saw over those 16 years faile to suggest. What happened? Well, in the first session, I laid out what I had gone through over the past 18 months, which you all are aware of. It's coming up to the first anniversary of my loss, and I am very sad about that, but as you all know, I am not wallowing in depression. I had two sessions and each time I came out extremely upset. The trick cyclist gave me a questionnaire about my feelings, full of those "Do you ever ..." type questions. The majority I answered "Never" adn one or two "Sometimes". For the pleasure of her time, I got to fork out $250 per session and got a measly $80-odd rebate.

 

When I got home, I completed the questionnaire and wrote a letter explaining that the psychologist did not appear to be working towards an assessment, just stringing me along for more sessions. Therefore I was not going to continue. RESULT: Not even an acknowledgement of my letter, nor an indication that my decision was possibly unfortunate, but understandable.