Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

This is from the Australian Conservatives' Immigration platform:

 

Permanent residents will be subject to ongoing character tests,

 

Obviously, this is an idea that has not been thought out completely. Clearly, it was meant to be directed at those who have been admitted as refugees from the Middle Eastern and Asian conflicts.

 

However, there's a sting in the tail. The Australian Citizenship (Amendment) Act 1984 became effective on 22 November 1984 and made significant changes, including that Australian law would no longer regard Australians as "British subjects". British subjects in Australia who were not Australian citizens became permanent residents . How many of the kids who came to Australia with their parents as ten Pound Poms know about this change and made a decision about becoming Australian citizens (for a price). The only time you really encounter this is when you want to go outside Australia for a holiday and find the you need a Permanent Resident Visa to get back to the home you worked for all your life in Australia, and your kids and grandkids who were born here.

 

So, under the Australian Conservatives immigration platform, every person born in Great Britain; having arrived in Australia before 1984 and living and working permanently in Australia, can be subjected to ongoing character testing. Fail the test, and it's reverse Transportation.

 

Farewell to old Sydney for ever,

 

Farewell to my rum coves as well,

 

Farewell to the well-known old haunts,

 

Where I used for to cut such a swell.

 

Chorus:

 

Singing too-ral-li, oo-ral-li, addity,

 

Singing too-ral-li, oo-ral-li, ay,

 

Singing too-ral-li, oo-ral-li, addity,

 

And we're bound for far over the way.

 

'Taint leaving old Sydney we cares about,

 

'Taint cos we miss what we knows,

 

But because all we light coloured gentry

 

Ain't true Aussies, as our Gov'ment knows.

 

Oh, had I the wings of a wedge-tail,

 

I'd soar on my pinions so high,

 

Straight back to the rooms of my Pollie, love

 

And I'd peck out each one of his eyes.

 

Now all my young Pommies and Geezers

 

Take warning from what I've to say:

 

Mind that you all own your visas

 

Or you'll be leaving Botany Bay

 

 

Posted

Yes, reading between the carefully crafted wording of their online policy, and working out what they really translate to, starts to ring warning bells in my head.

 

I do have a similar problem when I compare the other parties policies, too. Especially when I compare their claimed policy with their actual behaviour when they get into power, or, if in opposition, the things they say in the media.

 

 

Posted

A soon as I looked at the "About us " page on their website and saw that the two main people are Cory Bernadi and Lyle Shelton, both right-wing religious nutters I felt less inclined to read any further (although I did read their policy page)

 

 

Posted

That's why I laughed, Cory Bernardi is barking mad. He's the one that said gay marriage would lead to bestiality, among other pearls of wisdom.

 

Still, if the conservative rump of the Liberal party jumped ship and joined them, you'd have all the nutters in one place to split the One Nation / Palmer / Katter crazy vote, and the moderate remains of the Libs could bring themselves back to slightly right of centre where the party belongs.

 

 

Posted

They are NOT LIBERALS and what's more, obviously don't know what the word means. The American Democrats are Liberals. Without the Holy Coaly Nats they won't hold enough seats to be a government and that relationship has soured somewhat. As it now stands they can (and have) delivered an ultimatum to control Rivers and we have seen what that did to the Darling and Murray systems. The Libs are likely to be taken over by the Mormon church. at preselection level. Nev

 

 

Posted

You can't be serious Nev. There is a Mormon church near me, and it helps me keep my feet on the ground. If I ever begin to think there is any hope for the human race, I only have to go past that church and be corrected by the sight of it.

 

 

Posted

. I'd remove the blanket tax exemption granted to Religions and then re-apply it only for genuine charity work performed., not god related after life resort booking gatekeeper claims. Nev

 

 

Posted

I think the association you describe is in practice not operable, while in theory, it exists. There was a time when the Brit monarchy was very tied to the church (of the time) and cleansing? wars were fought. That's why my ancestors came here around 1860. Nev

 

 

Posted

If the crown is the head of the Church of England, what will happen when Charles assumes the position. He is a divorcee and it was that sort of position which caused the Queens uncle to have to abdicate.

 

 

Posted

Yeah, but it was a divorce that made the English Crown the Head of the Church in England.

 

Besides, Diana died on 31 August 1997 and Charlie and Horse-face didn't marry until 2005. So he didn't divorce in order to remarry. Horse-face is the divorcee.

 

 

Posted

The Queen changed the rules on divorces, ( She blames that law for her father's death.)

 

& now the Prince & princesses can be divorcees.

 

But

 

Princess Margaret is Not an "HRH", as the Queen changed that too.

 

spacesailor

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...