Truepolitik In Recess

Hi, everyone

Truepolitik is going into hibernation for an indefinite period. It is likely that this will be my last post.

I have been a bit crook lately, with the flu, so I apologise for my lack of posts.

I note, however, that the so-called "Convoy of No Confidence" has a battery of Liberal / National Party organisers & promoters. This includes Mick Pattel, reportedly disendorsed by the Liberal National Party of Qld for the seat of Mt Isa; Alan Jones, former Liberal Party candidate in several seats in NSW; Barnaby Joyce, National Party Senator, and Liberal Party Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.

I would like to know the level of involvement of Tony Abbott's staff, paid as public servants, in the organisation. Perhaps a media organisation will make a FOI request.

Meanwhile, Labor MHR Craig Thomson probably has some serious explaining to do to his pregnant wife and the Labor Party, at least. It has been alleged, with copies of credit card statements, that he used a union corporate card for "escort services" from a brothel. Leaving aside that that, in itself is not illegal, the use of a corporate card for personal non-work related items raises the question of ethics. And that is different from criminal. If the police investigate, it might possibly lead to a charge of fraud against teh union for whom he then worked.

Thank you to my followers. I hope that you will pick up the baton of helping to publicise the  shortcomings of politicians.

John
XOXOXOX

Deal With Refugees On Our Turf: Fr Frank Brennan

[the following article is rewritten from a News Ltd story, referenced below. It is designed to show how media write their stories to create a particular opinion]

HUMAN rights intellectual and lawyer Father Frank Brennan says that we should deal with people (refugees by boat arrival) “efficaciously, quickly and on our on terms and on our own turf”. Father Brennan is professor of law in the Institute of Legal Studies at the Australian Catholic University, and professor of human rights and social justice at the University of Notre Dame Australia.
"Given that people will continue to do very desperate things for the most understandable of human reasons, what is the moral bottom line below which we will not descend as a nation in terms of the protection of our borders," he told ABC radio.

Father Brennan, a staunch opponent of the use of Nauru for processing of boat arrivals, acknowledged it worked to some extent in stopping the boats, in conjunction with other measures such as temporary protection visas. However, Fr Brennan went on: "To say that Malaysia is morally reprehensible is not to espouse Nauru. It's to say that yes, Nauru is the lesser moral evil.", but questioned whether it would work a second time around.
The prominent Jesuit priest said people in leaky boats would continue to arrive in Australia. "We should deal with them efficaciously, quickly and on our on terms and on our own turf”, he said.
Under the Malaysia plan, the Government wants to send 800 asylum seekers to Kuala Lumpur in exchange for 4000 already processed refugees. Father Brennan said Labor seemed determined to come up with something even more ruthless than the former government, conveying the message to asylum seekers that they would definitely would never get to Australia.

The Coalition says Australia should reopen the Nauru processing centre. But Fr Brennan said "I think it could well be ineffective. (the second time round)"

Meanwhile, no asylum seekers will be sent to Malaysia until a High Court case has been resolved, Federal Cabinet secretary Mark Dreyfus has confirmed.  Mr Dreyfus said the Federal Government would abide by the letter and the spirit of an interim injunction stopping the transfer of asylum seekers. Lawyers for up to 42 people who the Government intends to send to Malaysia have challenged the people swap arrangement.

The High Court will hear the case later in August."We're going to treat (the injunction) as applying to all the people who were to be transferred to Malaysia, even those who are not participating in this court case," Mr Dreyfus told Sky News today.
----


Here is the News Ltd version, with a promotional slant for the Coalition’s Nauru Solution. Note the first line – designed to reinforce Coalition’s policy on Nauru.
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/nauru-lesser-evil-than-malaysia-deal-says-father-frank-brennan/story-e6frfku0-1226112194561 

HUMAN rights intellectual and lawyer Father Frank Brennan says the Nauru solution could be considered a lesser moral evil than the asylum-seeker swap deal with Malaysia.

Father Brennan, a staunch opponent of the use of Nauru for processing of boat arrivals, acknowledged it worked to some extent in stopping the boats, in conjunction with other measures such as temporary protection visas.
But he questioned whether it would work a second time around.
"Given that people will continue to do very desperate things for the most understandable of human reasons, what is the moral bottom line below which we will not descend as a nation in terms of the protection of our borders," he told ABC radio.
"To say that Malaysia is morally reprehensible is not to espouse Nauru. It's to say that yes, Nauru is the lesser moral evil."
The prominent Jesuit priest said people in leaky boats would continue to arrive in Australia.

"We should deal with them efficaciously, quickly and on our on terms and on our own turf," he said.
Under the Malaysia plan, the Government wants to send 800 asylum seekers to Kuala Lumpur in exchange for 4000 already processed refugees.
The Coalition says Australia should reopen the Nauru processing centre.
Father Brennan said Labor seemed determined to come up with something even more ruthless than the former government, conveying the message to asylum seekers that they would definitely would never get to Australia.
He said said the Opposition was promising a reopened Nauru processing centre would provide appropriate health and education, prompt processing with proper scrutiny and guaranteed resettlement.
"Then in that situation, the question would be second time round, would it actually work," he said.
"I think it could well be ineffective."
Father Brennan is professor of law in the Institute of Legal Studies at the Australian Catholic University, and professor of human rights and social justice at the University of Notre Dame Australia.
Meanwhile, no asylum seekers will be sent to Malaysia until a High Court case has been resolved, Federal Cabinet secretary Mark Dreyfus has confirmed.
Mr Dreyfus said the Federal Government would abide by the letter and the spirit of an interim injunction stopping the transfer of asylum seekers.
Lawyers for up to 42 people who the Government intends to send to Malaysia have challenged the people swap arrangement.
The High Court will hear the case later in August.
"We're going to treat (the injunction) as applying to all the people who were to be transferred to Malaysia, even those who are not participating in this court case," Mr Dreyfus told Sky News today.
----

Meanwhile Paul Maley, writing in The Australian, wrote:

“Father Brennan … said the Coalition's alternative policy of processing asylum-seekers on Nauru is the more moral option.”

At no stage, ever, did Fr Brennan say, or imply, that the Nauru solution was moral. He did refer to both the Malaysian Solution, and the use of Nauru, as “moral evil”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/jesuit-priest-argues-malaysia-solution-worse-option-than-howards-pacific-solution/story-fn59niix-1226111970896

I believe that both News Ltd pieces from the Internet and from The Australian show sufficient bias and intent to manipulate public opinion that the News Ltd journalists have abrogated their responsibility to report impartially. They have certainly twisted the intent of Fr Frank Brennan’s opinion. Paul Maley, writing in The Australian, is worse, because he attributes the Nauru Solution as moral, when Fr Brennan described it as a “moral evil”. I believe my re-write is a more accurate representation of Fr Frank Brennan's position and arguments in the interview ... and I'm an amateur!

John

Nile’s Unchristian Attack on Ethics

Fred Nile, speaking while introducing a Bill to remove ethics classes in the Legislative Council on 5-August, said:

''It's relative ethics, which is the basis of secular humanism,'' Mr Nile told parliament. ''I believe this is the philosophy that we saw during World War II with the Nazis and with the Communists.'' ¹

He also asked a Question Without Notice to the Hon. Duncan Gay, representing the Minister for Education in the Legislative Council.² The purpose of the question is to try to undermine ethics classes, which only began in Term 1, 2011. Information about the program can found at
Wikipedia ³ differentiates relative and absolute Ethics in the following terms:

There is a distinction between relative (or personal or cultural value) and absolute (or noumenal) value … Relative value is subjective, depending on individual and cultural views, and is therefore synonymous with personal and cultural value. Absolute value, on the other hand, is philosophically absolute and independent of individual and cultural views, as well as independent of whether it is apprehended or not.
Relative value may be regarded as an 'experience' by subjects of the absolute value. Relative value thus varies with individual and cultural interpretation, while absolute value remains constant, regardless of individual or collective 'experience' of it.

In terms of Rev. Fred Nile’s criticism of relative ethics, and his desire for absolute, God-commanded, morals/ethics, consider the following situation as told by Norman Anderson, and published on biblicalstudies.org.uk ⁴  (pp32-33):

“Imagine that I was standing on a lonely heath, where a single path divided into two―the one branch winding down into a wood and the other running up over a hill―when suddenly a little girl ran along and took the path into the wood, followed, some two minutes later, by a man with wild eyes who demanded to know which path she had taken. What should I do in such a situation? The ideal solution, perhaps, would be to take him home for a cup of tea or coffee; but he might not accept the invitation! The next best thing might be to engage him in conversation until he became calm and rational and the little girl had had plenty of time to get away. But suppose neither of these alternatives seemed feasible. In such circumstances I should myself unhesitatingly point to the path up the hill and tell him that she had gone that way―knowing perfectly well that I was telling him a downright lie. I hope, moreover, that I would realise that to tell lies is to go against a principle of abiding moral validity, and that it is intrinsically evil.”

Fred Nile would, guided by his absolute ethics/morals, be bound to tell the truth, almost certainly to the young girl’s peril. But he would have been ‘absolutely moral’ in telling the truth!  Of course, the most moral & the most ethical action is to lie, in order to ensure the girl’s safety, but this relies on Relative Ethics.  Rev Nile’s argument that relative ethics is the same as the philosophy used by the Nazis and Communism is nonsense, and unchristian in its proposed treatment of other people, in particular the students and parents. It is worth noting, too, that Rev Nile is bound by a Parliamentary Code of Conduct ⁵,  based on … relative ethics! I’m not sure how he feels about that.

As a Catholic, I'm offended by Fred Nile's stance on Ethics, by his attempt to impose a theocratic rules on secular, public education, and by his unchristian treatment of the people of NSW.

You can read more about the NSW Public School School Ethics Program at www.primaryethics.com.au  and http://parents4ethics.org
In preparing this post, I looked at:

1. http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nazi-ideology-in-ethics-classes-says-nile-20110805-1ifft.html#ixzz1UJLdw0UT
2. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/parlment/hansart.nsf/V3Key/LC20110803012?open&refNavID=HA8_1
3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(ethics)
4. http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/vox/vol09/ethics_anderson.pdf
5. http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/web/common.nsf/key/membersethics 
6. http://www.primaryethics.com.au/building.html 
7. http://parents4ethics.org/support-the-ethics-classes/

John

NSW School Certificate Going

The NSW government has announced that 2010 is to be last year of the NSW School Certificate. It will be replaced by a statement of achievement when students leave in Years 10, 11, or 12. Students who complete Yr 12 and sit for public exams will still be awarded a Higher School Certificate.

The current requirement for students in NSW is that until they reach the age of 17 they must be:

• studying at school, including Vocational Education & Training (VET) subjects. Some VET subjects can be studied at TAFE; OR
• in “full time” employment of 25 hrs/week or more;OR
• in full-time training eg at TAFE 

School and VET subjects are approved by the NSW Board of Studies. ¹

The School Certificate has been reviewed several times, but the previous Labor Government continued to support its existence, even as other states recognised the declining value of theirs. Today, the announcement has finally been made. A brief summary about the school certificate can be found on Wikipedia ²

In preparing this post, I looked at:

1. http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au 
2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_Certificate 

John