VERYSTORMY Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Another worthy mention. Former Liberal leaders Malcolm Fraser and John Hewson have signed an open letter backing the ANU for their decision to divest from fossil fuel companies. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/15/malcolm-fraser-john-hewson-back-anu-fossil-fuel-divestment An important point of note: a lot of the companies that have been divested in this are not fossil fuel producers and several are award winners for environmental and community work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share Posted October 15, 2014 An important point of note: a lot of the companies that have been divested in this are not fossil fuel producers and several are award winners for environmental and community work. Whether or not that's true, what business is it of the govt to comment on what a university invests in, never mind 1% of its total investment holdings? It just makes them (the govt) look petty and bullying. In much the same way as when Brandis threatened to pull funding on the Sydney Biennale, after the artists made a stand against Transfield http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/15/malcolm-fraser-john-hewson-back-anu-fossil-fuel-divestment The university has announced its offloading holdings in Iluka Resources, Independence Group, Newcrest Mining, Sandfire Resources, Oil Search, Santos and Sirius Resources for ethical reasons. The decision represents 1% of the university’s total investment holdings. Treasurer Joe Hockey and education minister Christopher Pyne have criticised the move. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VERYSTORMY Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 None of their business. But I wonder how everyone would feel if these businesses then stipulated that will not hire any ANU graduate. Also note, that at least one of them is considering legal action over this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 None of their business. But I wonder how everyone would feel if these businesses then stipulated that will not hire any ANU graduate. Also note, that at least one of them is considering legal action over this. Wonder if they'll cancel all the courses where damage could be done to the environment by their graduates? Seems a logical step. They'd better look at Computer Science and Software grads. too. A lot of them go to work for defence companies that are killing people. No worse damage to the World than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celt Down Under Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 The words below though short, say much. "When all the trees have been cut down, when all the animals have been hunted, when all the waters are polluted, when all the air is unsafe to breathe, only then will you discover you cannot eat money." Cree Prophecy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 It gets cold in Canberra in winter. I wonder how many of the people at ANU turn the heating off it is powered by coal or oil or wood? And do they refuse to drive or be driven in any vehicle that is petrol or diesel powered? What happens if they get sick and need drugs produced by the evil "Big Pharma" or their hospital is heated by fossil fuels? What about the clothes they wear? Made by awful companies in the Third World using child slave labor and using machinery powered by fossil fuels? What about all the other companies they HAVE invested in? Have they all been vetted? No tobacco, no alcohol, no drugs, no arms manufacturing, nothing else nasty? No companies owned by Israel of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul1Perth Posted October 15, 2014 Share Posted October 15, 2014 Whether or not that's true, what business is it of the govt to comment on what a university invests in, never mind 1% of its total investment holdings? It just makes them (the govt) look petty and bullying. In much the same way as when Brandis threatened to pull funding on the Sydney Biennale, after the artists made a stand against Transfield http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/15/malcolm-fraser-john-hewson-back-anu-fossil-fuel-divestment The university has announced its offloading holdings in Iluka Resources, Independence Group, Newcrest Mining, Sandfire Resources, Oil Search, Santos and Sirius Resources for ethical reasons. The decision represents 1% of the university’s total investment holdings. Treasurer Joe Hockey and education minister Christopher Pyne have criticised the move. If a government minister is asked about what he thinks about certain subjects I think they have an obligation to reply. They get paid for that sort of stuff. Wouldn't have gone down too well if he said "I've no idea, none of my business". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted October 15, 2014 Author Share Posted October 15, 2014 If a government minister is asked about what he thinks about certain subjects I think they have an obligation to reply. They get paid for that sort of stuff. Wouldn't have gone down too well if he said "I've no idea, none of my business". I agree up to a point Paul, but not with this govt and not on this issue. They have their paymasters to appease and I suspect they're demanding their pound of flesh: cue Abbbbot to come in and shirtfront the ANU. Tony Abbott attacks ANU's 'stupid decision' to dump fossil fuel investments Date October 15, 2014 - 1:15PM 73 reading now Lisa Cox National political reporter View more articles from Lisa Cox Follow Lisa on Twitter Follow Lisa on Google+ Email Lisa Twitter submit to reddit Email article Print Prime Minister Tony Abbott: "Australia ought to be one of the world's energy superpowers." Photo: Jason South John Hewson and Malcolm Fraser blast Liberals over ANU backlash Prime Minister Tony Abbott has escalated the government's attack on the Australian National University, describing the institution's divestment from certain fossil fuel companies as a "stupid decision". It comes as the government faces growing criticism for trying to "bully and coerce" the ANU, with a group of prominent Australians lashing its attempts to interfere with the university's investment decisions. Former Liberal leader John Hewson said Tony Abbott's criticism of ANU was "just bullying: and "might have more substance if he had a energy policy". Photo: Alex Ellinghausen Speaking in Melbourne on Wednesday, the Prime Minister defended the government's crusade, which has seen senior figures including Treasurer Joe Hockey and Education Minister Christopher Pyne speak out against the university's dumping of shares in seven resources companies. Advertisement "Of course they should be free to do what they want but when they make stupid decisions we should be free to criticise them," Mr Abbott said. "Any entity which says that they're simply not going to invest in energy companies is frankly depriving its members of the benefit of some very good investments. "Australia ought to be one of the world's energy superpowers." Two days after Mr Abbott described coal as being "good for humanity", the Prime Minister reiterated his view that fossil fuels were part of a future in which Australia "ought to be the world's affordable energy capital". "That means in the months and years and decades to come, Australia's energy companies will be a very good investment for people who are sensible enough to see where their opportunities are," he said. Former Liberal leader John Hewson, who is among more than 50 prominent Australians and ethical investors who have signed an open letter urging the government to end its attacks on the ANU, has questioned why the university's decision has brought such wrath. The shareholdings to be liquidated are worth an estimated $16 million, representing less than 2 per cent of the university's $1.1 billion portfolio. Mr Hewson said on Wednesday that the criticism was indicative of the government's "seasoned mentality when it comes to climate change". Mr Hewson said the Prime Minister's remarks "might have some substance if he had an energy policy". "It's quite possible the ANU still supports the energy sector even if it sheds investments in particularly companies," he said. "This is just bullying. "By what criteria is it a stupid decision?" Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-attacks-anus-stupid-decision-to-dump-fossil-fuel-investments-20141015-116a0y.html#ixzz3GCHQB5aQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted October 17, 2014 Share Posted October 17, 2014 Have I told you lately that I love you - Tony Abbott I mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted October 19, 2014 Author Share Posted October 19, 2014 After the hilarity of 'shirtfront-gate', we now have 'girlieman-gate' http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/19/mathias-cormann-denies-his-economic-girlie-man-insult-is-sexist?CMP=soc_567 [h=1]Mathias Cormann denies his 'economic girlie-man' insult is sexist[/h] Penny Wong says the finance minister’s jibe sends a message that girls are ‘somehow less confident, weak’ Share Tweet this Email Daniel Hurst, political correspondent theguardian.com, Sunday 19 October 2014 01.04 BST Jump to comments (195) Mathias Cormann: ‘I hope you are not going to say I am a sexist misogynist.’’ Photograph: TRACEY NEARMY/AAPIMAGE Australia’s finance minister, Mathias Cormann, has denied making any gender-specific insult in labelling the opposition leader, Bill Shorten, as an “economic girlie man”. Labor’s leader in the Senate, Penny Wong, said the remark – made during an interview about the budget stalemate on Saturday – sent an inappropriate message to girls that they were weak. “I don’t think using girlie as an insult is the sort of thing a cabinet minister or any serious political leader should be saying,” Wong told Sky News on Sunday. “I just think if we use girl as an insult what are we telling our sons and our daughters about being a girl? You’re saying it’s somehow less confident, weak, whatever the imputation – I just don’t think that’s sensible. “Imagine if we used any racial term in the way it was used. I think we would all be outraged for the same reasons.” Cormann sought to defend his comments after Labor and the Greens suggested they were reflective of a government that had just one woman in the 19-member cabinet. “I am not talking about girls. I am talking about economic girlie men,’’ the minister told News Corp’s Sunday papers. “I don’t think there’s anything gender-specific here. Not girls, girlies; it’s very different. I hope you are not going to say I am a sexist misogynist.’’ In a further statement issued on Sunday, Cormann said his comment was intended to point out that Shorten could not secure Labor support for Labor’s own previously budgeted savings measures. “No amount of confected outrage from Bill Shorten, Labor and the Greens can detract from the fact that he is too weak to repair the budget mess Labor left behind,” Cormann said. “Economic girlie men has come to adopt its own meaning. It is not in any way intended as a reflection on girls, it is entirely intended as a reflection on Bill Shorten.” The finance minister was responding to Shorten’s claim that the budget was “more likely to get back to surplus under a Labor government than this current mob”. Adapting , Cormann told Sky News: “The problem that the Labor Party has today is that Bill Shorten is an economic girlie man. He doesn’t have what it takes to repair the budget mess that they have left behind.” The education minister, Christopher Pyne, described his colleague’s remark as “colourful” language. “I have to say it’s unusual for Mathias to use a colourful phrase,” Pyne told Sky News. “I think the point that Mathias was making is that Bill Shorten wants to have it both ways; he wants to have his cake and eat it too, which is very nice if you can get it, but quite frankly it’s not that easy.” Pyne said the Australian people knew “that you have to be firm in controlling the treasury”. The Greens senator Senator Larissa Waters said women would be appalled that Cormann had “chosen to use gender as a derogatory attack”. “What more can you expect from a government with just one woman in cabinet and a prime minister who thinks women should be at home ironing,” Waters said. Schwarzenegger used the phrase in a 2004 Republican convention speech: “To those critics who are so pessimistic about our economy I say don’t be economic girlie men.” Last month, the satirical ABC program Mad as Hell featured an actor playing a fictional spokesman for Cormann telling host Shaun Micallef: “You’re being an economic girlie man.” During a Senate debate in September 2005 about the full privatisation of Telstra, the Labor senator Ursula Stephens said: “This is much, much more than I can say for [former Liberal MP] Alby Schultz, who has acted as a ‘telecommunications girly man’.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted October 19, 2014 Author Share Posted October 19, 2014 TBH I don't think this gaffe should be taken too seriously, but it is telling that a cabinet member (in a cabinet with only 1 woman) should use a gender based slur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 TBH I don't think this gaffe should be taken too seriously, but it is telling that a cabinet member (in a cabinet with only 1 woman) should use a gender based slur. Absolutely. I mean, seriously?. Who uses language like this and wants to be taken seriously in politics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Wonder if they'll cancel all the courses where damage could be done to the environment by their graduates? Seems a logical step. They'd better look at Computer Science and Software grads. too. A lot of them go to work for defence companies that are killing people. No worse damage to the World than that. It is all the usual hypocritical BS that leftie institutions periodically go through - eg boycotting Israeli academics, but no academics from any other country, many of them far, far worse than Israel (still a democracy of course.) If you want to 'ethically' invest, then there is probably not a single company that 'fits the bill', given how many of them diversify their businesses. Picking on these companies is the easy way out. If you hate fossil fuel producers and users so much, then boycott China and Chinese products, eg, buy no Chinese-sourced or produced products from Bunnings and Blackwoods! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 'Handbags!' But at least it will keep ISIS and Ebola from dominating Q & A tomorrow night and the letters page of the Fairfax Press. My God, one day last week, the Sydney Morning Herald printed thirteen letters condemning Tony Abbott for insulting Putin, and only one of them at least mentioned the reason for Abbott's continuing anger - the murder of Australians by Russian backed and armed rebels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted October 19, 2014 Author Share Posted October 19, 2014 @MARYROSE02, peace be with you, amen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MARYROSE02 Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Shalom! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 Oh FFS, he cannot open his gob without pissing off vast numbers of people, this time its the Aboriginal contingent (AGAIN), implying that Sydney was 'nothing but bush' pre 1788. Considering he describes himself as the Prime Minister for Indigenous Affairs (or whatever pap title he gave himself) he's doing a good job of subscribing to the pre-Mabo Terra Nullius version of events. [h=1]Prime Minister Tony Abbott describes Sydney as 'nothing but bush' before First Fleet arrived in 1788[/h] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-14/abbot-describes-1778-australia-as-nothing-but-bush/5892608?WT.mc_id=Corp_News-Nov2014|News-Nov2014_FBP|abcnews Keep digging Tone, 2016 can't come soon enough. I SO look forward to booting you out of office you @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You can be such a tosser sometimes. Okay I'll play along. What was it really then if not bush ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 You can be such a tosser sometimes. Okay I'll play along. What was it really then if not bush ? There were people here, the oldest known human civilisation, stretching back to the dawn of homo sapiens, you tosser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 So. He was talking the landscape. Wasn't it bush ? or was there something else there that he and I don't know about ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harpodom Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 Context. He's got form on this subject. You are grossly underestimating the scale of the damage this little man does with his mealy mouth parley. When he talks 'off message' (without Peta whispering in his ear), the results are catastrophic. I'm sure you can't see it but then again you can't see a lot of things Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I just don't get the issues you raise at all. He says something that is obviously true and you decide it is a gaffe. Can you please raise some posts other than political sour grapes as it is so tiresome having to read this crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 You can be such a tosser sometimes. Okay I'll play along. What was it really then if not bush ? Seriously Parley? An Indigenous people with a history and a culture which stretches back 40,000 years. So probably 39, 970 or so years before you arrived here. The first Australians. But apparently they're invisible to you and Tones? And you cry 'racism' when someone has the temerity to take the piss out of your adopted country. FFS :no: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I have asked you what was the landscape if not bush ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parley Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I'm waiting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.