Monthly Archives: October 2011

So what’s the point of the “occupy” protests? Obviously they weren’t going to get a sympathetic ear – or any kind of fair hearing (did you know that if you buy a mobile phone or a computer you’re agreeing with anything done by corporate Australia and may never object to it again?) – in the commercial media, but what were they trying to achieve? What has standing around in a crowd chanting slogans ever achieved?

Well, for one, it shows politicians that it’s not just the far-right who are angry with where things are going. The anti-carbon tax and “tea party” type protests have obviously sunk into the feeling of some of our politicians, who might be tempted to think – if everyone else remains silent – that they have some kind of popular support for passing ever more right-wing policies. Because for every person on the fringe angry enough to let Alan Jones bus them to Canberra, they might reason, there’s probably a few more voters angry but too busy to come. This could be the tip of the iceberg! I’d better do what they want.

So a protest from the other side helps balance out that pressure. Even if that’s all it does, it’s still arguably worthwhile for that reason alone.

Second, it lets politicians know that there are people out there – possibly many more than have simply attended the protest, for the reasons above – who think we’re going too far down the American path. Who want them to consider the public sphere, the poor, the community as a whole, when deciding whether or not to support legislation that either redresses the imbalances in our society or which makes them worse.

The protesters don’t need to come up with a set of specific policy proposals to have an important impact. What they’re calling for is clear – policies to redress inequality. The opposite of what the so-called “pro-business” low tax advocates lobby for in Canberra. And when legislation comes before the parliament on economic issues, the politicians are on notice that they’re being watched by voters who want the balance to go back the other way for a change.

Sure, there’ll always be a few ratbags at any protest. They don’t have bouncers. We saw it at the anti-Carbon tax rallies, too (although it did seem to be more than a few of them). Even the police had their ratbags, giving the rest of them, the ordinary, decent members, a bad name – those who removed their name badges and thumped people. But so what? That’s no reason to give up on the idea of popular protest.

Protests tell government the direction in which ordinary, engaged people would like it to go. When we have three years between elections and the blunt instrument of a mostly two-party system even then, where the voters’ precise directions are sometimes difficult to discern accurately, protests are a necessary and important part of the process of democracy.

Even if they’re inconvenient and annoying.

I don’t agree that an Ombudsman, concerned about the inadequate funding of his office, suggesting some “dorothy dixer” type questions he can be asked so that he can express the concerns of his office, is somehow “corrupt”. This is a political system where half of Parliament’s most prominent hour every day is taken up with “dorothy dixer” questions from the government to itself. And whilst an ombudsman isn’t supposed to be party-political, are they really supposed to be neutral on absolutely everything? Against the interests of the office they represent and the citizens it is supposed to protect? How else are they to get these concerns aired, if the big party politicians do not care?

THE Commonwealth Ombudsman has conceded he was unwise and compromised the independence of his office by actively colluding with the Greens, but said he had no other way to air his concerns about government policy.

Following revelations he scripted loaded questions on immigration, defence and taxation for the Greens to ask him during budget estimates hearings, Allan Asher called for a special parliamentary committee or some other mechanism so he could directly raise his concerns.

And until then, why shouldn’t he work within the system as much as he can? In the interests of the ordinary Australians on whose behalf he’s employed?

I don’t see that asking a Senator in a position to raise the office’s concerns to do so in the public forum of budget estimates is improper at all. Unless you define “holding the big parties to account” as “improper”. No wonder they’re united in smearing the Ombudsman and the Greens for daring to challenge them.

Man, it’s a bad time to be a supporter of one of the big parties, isn’t it? You think you know what you’re getting, and then you get the opposite, even if it’s one of the things they were most clear about.

I mean – Liberal voters, right? How badly were they let down by the Liberal Party! If they really want asylum seekers processed offshore, then what the hell was the party they voted for doing choosing the status quo – onshore processing – over offshore processing? Man, you’d never want to vote for those guys again. You can’t rely on them to be as xenophobic as they promised to be. Why would anyone vote for the Liberal Party if they can’t even hold to their most deeply-held conviction?

And the Labor Party! It’s let down its supporters who wanted offshore processing by refusing to negotiate with the Liberals to get it through. It’s also let down its supporters who wanted to treat refugees humanely by doing everything in its power not to. Why would anyone vote for the Labor Party again?

I know that even though the Greens give their voters consistent, reliable advocacy for their political views, they’re not for everyone. Xenophobes, the greedy, authoritarians, bigots – the Greens probably won’t represent you in parliament either. Actually, they’d be pretty much consistently opposed to everything you want. But you should take a leaf out of their voters’ book and look at promoting your own smaller, more specific parties. Look what the Greens achieved for progressives that would never have been achieved if they just voted Labor or Liberal. Maybe you should be looking for your own “Greens” of the right, or wherever you are on the political spectrum.

Because, seriously, what value are you getting from your Labor or Liberal vote? It’s just a waste. Your representatives are jokes. Those guys have all but five of the House of Representatives seats, and agree on offshore processing, and yet they couldn’t work together long enough to give their voters what both sets apparently wanted.

That’s some pretty crappy representation right there. I’m glad my vote wasn’t wasted on them.