Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category

Well it’s been difficult keeping up with the journos asking questions while sniggering, Clive beaming after announcing a Rose or Jack (or both) are on the way, and Tom Waterhouse ringing for inside info on the possible names. You’d think the prat would have more pressing concerns.

Add to this Peter Slipper being in then out, accepted then resigning but no he was rejected because Clive thought he was a mole.

I’m getting about as much sleep as a Catholic priest on his fourth parish.

Clive has declared his appearance on Q&A ‘a fucking success’, and much credit must go to the big man. After his demands of Janet Albrechtsen hosting, only him and BobKat on the panel and a strict rider of Chiko Rolls and M&Ms were left unmet, he soldiered on. It’s a pity he forgot to switch out of campaign filming mode to say what he really thought, to show some fire and soul. I’ve personally seen more grunt from a Kia Cerato. His self appraisal is shall we say different.

Clive did get quite animated though when it came to registering the UAP with the AEC. Who knew that the Uniting Australia Party had already registered in March? Undeterred, Clive went left-field and humble, and as of now we are the Palmer United Party (PUP). I’m hoping no smartarse extends the acronym to PUMP for any of his MPs should they get in. But then as Clive says, names aren’t important, it’s ideas that matter.

Ah yes. Ideas. Clive has an alternative asylum seeker policy. Quite rightly, he wants to take the business model out of people smugglers’ hands by flying asylum seekers into our airports where their refugee status is assessed. If they pass, they would be integrated, and if not, they would be flown back on the next plane. I’m curious to see how much of the $5B saved by not chasing boats around the Indian Ocean & dehumanising camps would be eaten up by these airport based processing facilities. I’ve asked Clive how he intends to house that many people, to which he touches his nose and winks. ‘All up here luv.’
Oh Gawd.

Running parallel with the gestational timeline is Clive’s desire to be PM. It will come as no surprise to hear that he believes the centre of power should be shifted away from Canberra further north, specifically Coolum. ‘The Kirribili of the fucking north luv!’ He booms. ‘Question time followed by 18 holes!‘ Yes Clive, I’m certain the Federation Fathers would approve.

Clive has raised the idea of me running for a seat. Playing dumb, I insist that I am happy in my current role. I admit though that I would relish the chance to run for Sturt, just to see the Poodle’s eyes pop when I debate him. Clive boasts that there sitting MPs ready become PUMPs, but I’m skeptical. The phone’s not exactly running hot with applicants outside of QLD.

So we plod on. Clive has already requested (demanded) a tripartite debate series with the PM, the ‘knob’ as he calls him and Clive.

No prizes for his preferred host.

Please direct PUP related questions my way via my twitter handle @PAforClive


Yes the rumours are true. Clive will appear on Q&A alongside fellow passionate Queenslander Bob Katter.

Some of the parameters I have set for the show are as follows:

1 Tony Jones to be removed as host and Janet Albrechtsen in.

2 No questions on tax policy – we all know what happened last time a Queenslander advocated a flat tax.

3 Clive to have access to a cold spoon under the desk (see point 1).

4 Rider preshow as previously agreed with the ABC (including the specific brand and quantity of Chiko rolls requested).

5 Audience composition must be >75% QLD, with no Greens.

6 Warwick Capper to be given special security lanyard for the night in case any nut bags think of coming in to the studio.

7 Emma Alberici to take the night off as there will be no Lateline (2 hour Q&A clause).

Clive is ready for all questions and, unlike Abbott & Gillard, does not his questions vetted or screened. He expects a fair fight with his friend Bob Katter.

Any Qs, tweet away.


Press Release
Thursday 9 May 11:30am

Just adding to the announcement of 5 UAP candidates, we wish to announce that while we have received an application if candidacy from Kyle Sandilands, we will not be taking this seriously.

For a start, he has no Mineralogy board experience and as far as we can tell, has not grown up on the Gold Coast.

We are on track to run candidates in 100 federal seats. Stay tuned.


Well, things have been interesting at UAP HQ. While some preselections are done and dusted, others are in no uncertain terms open.

Warwick Capper still rings on a daily basis playing hard to get, insisting ‘we both know you want me in the tent’. Notwithstanding the unpalatable thought of being in am actual tent with the Bogan Baron, his use of political speak is at once pathetic and earnest. Clive suggests we harness his wave of enthusiasm while it lasts before he goes into downturn. If anyone recognises short term ideas, it’s Clive.

Clive wants the NDIS. Pretty simple. What’s not so simple is his demand to drop taxes for personal and business scales to attract more business and inspire confidence. How this swims in the same stream as fiscal rectitude is beyond my cognition. While he calls flat tax proponents ‘fucking geese’, it is still unclear if he has concrete tax plans.

His analogy?
‘Reading the Henry Report isn’t the only way forward for tax reform. It’s like saying reading the Fifty Shades books makes you a better lover.’
Thanks for that image Boss.

Beyond this, I can relate the following ideas for our official UAP Campaign Launch.

– on the steps of the Opera House: ‘look how many turned to see Crowded House’. Yyyupp ok.
– in front of Tony Abbott’s house (Ill advised, especially as his furniture has already been moved to Kirribili Storage)
– at Luna Park with the world’s Guinness Book of Records BBQ

But we all know he’ll launch this campaign of a large vessel with a captain’s hat on.

‘People need to know who the skipper is y’know luv?’

Yes Clive.

Today we sorted through the myriad candidates applying for UAP preselection since Clive reinflated the concept.

The BobKat and Clive twin threats have certainly forced some cranks out of the undergrowth they’ve been living under.

Warwick Capper is one of the more sane applicants, which should indicate the treacle I’ve had to wade through.

Some of the applicants (with key points) include:


-42 year old truckie who wants preselection in any state of SA, NSW or QLD as he drives through all 3 states on a weekly basis
-‘the bastards who represent their constituents are only there every other month so I’d be more easy to talk to and stuff. They can ask me whatever the fuck they want’
-lists his address as: cabin of my Kenworth ‘Loretta’
-couldn’t give ‘rat’s toss bag’ about the carbon tax
-wants immigration increased so we can fill the spaces and get this country going again with big country towns

Colleen from Byron Bay
-58yr old Greens voter with a thing for rich altruists
-once cleaned Sir Joh’s office
-ready to take on more then just running a herbal soap shop on weekends
-once shared a joint with Brendan Nelson after they shared similar views on same sex marriage
-feels there is no need anymore for states and boundaries

-77yr old retired doctor from Charters Towers
-married for 58 yrs with 5 kids & 13 grandkids
-pro RU486
-wants legislation passed banning Tom Waterhouse’s image being seen anywhere
-rejected by the Bob Katter Party for being too liberal in his views

-24yr old law student
-thinks the tax system should be based on a 15% flat tax & GST of 20% with no other taxes
-wants at least 50 of the IPA’s 75pt wish list carried through
-will only join the UAP if Clive signs this last point

So as you see, the entry of Clive & Bob into the political marketplace had certainly spread the available talent thinner than a Brazilian Samba dancer’s G-string.

I may as well get all the applicants in a room, throw 120 rocks in the air and sign up the fallen. But we’ll spare Warwick. He’s had enough head injuries in his time.

Well, as usual I’m told last minute that Clive is:
1 sick of lobbyists
2 offering a difference
3 running for Fairfax
4 aiming to be Australia’s next PM

While still:
– running Mineralogy
– overseeing Titanic II

As you were then.


The Daily Telegraph’s now viral front page juxtaposing Senator Stephen Conroy with Stalin, Mao, Mugabe, Castro, Kim-Jong Un and Ahmadinejad was ironically an argument for and against free speech. Going in this hard on the man would not occur in most countries around the world, yet its crassness and overt sensationalism puts in question the Telegraph’s judgement. 

The Telegraph has shown lateral thinking by putting its cartoon on the front page but loses points for being sloppy and not including Hitler. One imagines the response if Sen Conroy had taken the harder line advocated by the Finkelstein Review.

That gold mine I call twitter provided two gems by way of response, from @geeksrulz and @firstdogonthemoon:



The reforms announced by Senator Conroy include:

  1. stronger self regulation via a Public Interest Media Advocate (PIMA)
  2. a new public interest test for future media mergers via a reach rule
  3. an incentive to increase Australian content
  4. an update to the ABC and SBS to factor in their online content

The PIMA would be a single person sitting above the existing Australian Press Council to ensure that complaints are appropriately managed, in addition to assessing whether any future media mergers are in the public interest. Given that News Corp already owns 68% of the Australian newspaper circulation, it could hardly be argued on an objective basis that some ownership restriction takes place. Malcolm Turnbull argues that the Hawke Government opened the doors for media ownership grabs when they allowed the HWT merger to proceed. Well, that was 22 years ago, and no internet.

The other question that lingers is why is print news remains unregulated where television and radio is?

The fact is that the proposed reforms represent a three pronged attack on the Murdoch and Fairfax interests. The body overseeing the body that oversees the media is seen as a threat to executive media operations and would seek to subject them to closer scrutiny. It could be argued however that the ACCC’s powers could be boosted to avoid unfair competitive advantage. Secondly, the PIMA would, in the media companies’ view, restrict market opportunities and hence trade. Thirdly, shock horror, such a person would demand that all reporting be  balanced and fair minded, not just a mouthpiece for its owner’s market fundamentalism and unashamed Americaphilia.

The News Corp publications have done a fine job in directing traffic in this way, starting with unwavering support for the Iraq War that resulted in anywhere up to 400,000 deaths for an invasion predicated on at best hopeful evidence of WMDs. More recently, the campaign against the ALP’s response to climate change has been sustained and, as Robert Manne calls it, ‘intellectually incoherent’. It has provided the Opposition with the wind assistance that has supplemented its feral negativity since the ALP formed government with cross bench support. The News Corp media have also made the portrayal of the changes as an attack on free speech almost too easy. It has employed tactics like the above front page to convey to its readers this fallacious and sensational message. So we have idiotic symbiosis where the media provides a dog’s breakfast and the reader digests it.

The Reach Rule proposed by Sen Conroy prevents a City based television broadcaster from purchasing regional interests where they would be able to broadcast to more than 75% of the population. How measurable this is remains unclear. Muddying the waters even more is the increasing uptake of digital content. When was the last time you recorded a program when you knew it was available online the next day?

Providing incentives to television stations by halving their licences in return for 1,490 more hours of Australian television in 2015 is a welcome one that surely must be the piece which does attract the most bipartisan support. The updating of the ABC and SBS charters in the digital climate is also logical.

So will these reforms  impact heavily on the way that journalists work’ as Malcolm Turnbull suggests?  It is an attempt to address concerns that the media can be too concentrated in the power of a few. There are doubts about its rushed timing and execution (an unfortunate characteristic of this Government), and it has attracted the inevitable criticisms of ‘changing the media when you don’t like the message.’ If that were the case, these reforms would have been announced long ago.

The impression I get via twitter is that some News Corp contributors feel that these reforms are a severe check their ability to produce factless diatribe and not be scrutinised. I await the snide IPA tweets with interest.

There will be some heavy lifting to convince those cross bench MPs who are upset that the reforms do not go far enough. If it causes angst to the MPs whose support it needs as well as the interests it is serving notice to then it seems to be somewhere close to an unhappy medium.

Writing this has served to crystallise in my mind what the media is. Jonathan Holmes makes the point that it is hard to believe the media anyway, let alone in their treatment of these reforms. Find out for yourself by reading seems to be the take home message. Read widely, follow people whose views challenge you and your opinions, not just those you unreservedly agree with .

These next two weeks will be fun reading and viewing.

Thanks to @geeksrulz and @firstdogonthemoon for their images.