Parliament no.48 opens

'Twenty-eight countries, including Australia, the UK and France, are demanding an immediate end to the war in Gaza and for Israel to lift aid restrictions.  The joint statement, signed by Foreign Minister Penny Wong, comes amid growing international concern over the number of deaths at aid sites in the enclave. It criticises what it calls the "inhumane killing" of Palestinians and condemns the "drip feeding of aid".  "We, the signatories listed below, come together with a simple, urgent message: the war in Gaza must end now," the foreign ministers of Britain, Australia, France, Italy, Japan, Canada, Denmark and other countries, and an EU commissioner, said in a joint statement. "We are prepared to take further action to support an immediate ceasefire and a political pathway to security and peace for Israelis, Palestinians and the entire region. ... Israel must comply with its obligations under international humanitarian law." The joint statement also includes a condemnation of Hamas's treatment of hostages held captive since the group's October 7, 2023, attack in Israel.'

Australia, UK, France and other nations call for immediate end to war in Gaza. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-21/uk-australia-france-joint-statement-end-war-in-gaza/105557108

When much new is old

It's a while since I attended my last book launch, although I hear plenty of similar discussions on ABCRN, but this one caught my eye.  Allan Answorth, barrister and part-time academic at UCan, was speaking on his latest publication, The Role of Rhetoric in Politics and the Media, in conversation with Jack Waterford.  It's a very local outing.  I read JW religiously each week, enjoying his observations and admiring his long knowledge, once Canberra Times editor and currently long-term opinion writer.  And a practising barrister and part-time academic looks to be a perfect source for a book on rhetoric, especially one who claims a long term interest in philosophy and a string of other intellectual interests.  The book outlines a range of linguistic, logical and ethical fallacies that are used in rhetorical technique then analyses two speeches by the current US president in this context.  The numbering and cross references in the book are complex and I am yet to clearly identify the number of fallacies discussed, but JW suggested over 150.  Amusingly, AA advised the naming of these fallacies is variously in common English or less common Ancient Greek for those known from that time.  There is history in such discussions.  Anyway, an interesting and occasionally amusing discussion and well informed on such matters.  Thus can someone trained as a barrister and subsequent academic compose.  Looking forward to reading his written words.

Allan Anforth (barrister, academic, author) was in conversation with Jack Waterford (journalist, opinion writer) at the launch of his book 'The role of rhetoric in politics and the media' at Paperchain bookshop, Manuka.

Royals 8

God help us.  I don’t write that about wars or poverty or power.  They can all be repaired over time. They are social matters.  They hurt people but society continues, somehow, despite grievous harm to many.  But I write for climate and that’s a matter of physics.  Drill baby drill is a recipe for burn baby burn and flood baby flood and more.  We hit tipping points in the climate and we lose control. As I write this, BBC is reporting that this year is the first to breech the 1.5degC barrier.  We can repair Japanese cities after nuclear bombs, but we can’t repair Earth after climate tipping points, or at least not for thousands or millions of years.  This is an existential danger and scientifically-accepted fact.  So I fear for our world.  But we must understand why Trump won.  The short term economics of Covid, the longer term economics of neo-liberalism, the local poverty of globalisation, the lost hope of financialisation of property and more, the unfairness of this winner take all approach.  And local matters like meekness, media, failed decision making.  The issue, though, is whether Trump will actually improve things for the very people who voted for him.  It may be emotionally satisfying to hear his rants but who will win?  The huge industries?  The billionaires?  And how does he go about his changes?  Legally?  Violently?  Justly?  But the losers must see their failures and blindnesses and unreasonablenesses.  Recognise their extremes (in identity, but more), state their purposes and argue strongly and convince.  Rail against weaknesses and failures and unfairnesses.  They too have work to do.  But perhaps it won’t matter with such a conception of a free world?  And maybe those tipping points will come even quicker than our new expectations expect.  And maybe the very structure of democracy is about to be dismantled.  Dangerous and distressing times.

Royals 7

It’s the morning of Wed 6 Nov in the Pacific and the evening of the election in the US.  The Melbourne Cup passed with little comment from the passengers I met although some fancy millinery appeared amongst some women on board.  That’s fun.  The election isn’t but I can say it’s been a test for my Talking Cure theory.  The Talking Cure is a song I wrote after another cruise with the theme of conversations with people you don’t agree with.  Certainly a cruise is a place to meet people outside Canberra liberal normality and that’s good and interesting and expanding if sometimes challenging.  I was amused to find myself in a lift with ~8 others.  There was a mention of the Melbourne Cup then of the other upcoming competition and an indignant Trumpish comment.  Then a mild statement from a well spoken American woman that she’d done her part (meaning voted early) and a knowing look.  Then a milder comment from the Trumpist that politicians are all corrupt.  That’s a common theme I’ve heard. And it carries some truth.  Certainly, it was interesting that the two major parties got together to produce the meagre corruption commission we now have and there are issues with whistleblowers and lobbyists and more.  To me, there’s also truth that many previously comfortable jobs and lives have been lost to Reagan/Thatcher policies, implemented in Australia by Labor, of course, if with more safeguards.  I remember two interview programs on BBC radio in two US midwest (?) towns in late 2016 and the Trump supporters were ordinary, middle class types and that was disconcerting.  They look much like those behind Trump events today.  I imagine they wouldn’t benefit from a Trump return but I guess they’d expect to.  Another more discrete supporter claimed Kamala is a Marxist, just hiding her stripes when she took over from Biden.  He also had issues with action on climate and argued that the death rates from Covid in the US was a function of hospitals corruptly claiming Covid for deaths to get government funding.  I hadn’t heard that one before.  Trouble is, with all these arguments and the Left’s arguments for multiple truths and the rest, it’s hard to find a path through these contradictions.  Common sense is argued as a response, but I prefer critical thinking as I doubt I can fully determine the science of climate change and other complex issues independently.  So the question becomes who do I trust and how can I triangulate.  I heard little detail in the discussions I had, but frequent broad claims.  It can be a challenge to civility and conversation so good.  So, it’s just hours to first electoral results and I am fascinated and disturbed.  The ultimate danger is not the wars and deaths that can we can rebuild from, as costly and hurtful as they can be, but the climate tipping points that we can’t.  In the meantime, have a listen to my The Talking Cure, from sky vs weather / The Pots.

Disappointments

It's not the first disappointing demo I've attended  but it was a significant disappointment.   It was held as the local Canberra event, the No to AUKUS Rally for the National action week against AUKIS, 8.30am outside Parliament House.  Some of the same faces were there, although not a member I had jsut met the night before.  He actually didn't know of it so I wonder how effective was the advertising.  There were four speakers and they all spoke well, Sen.  David Shoebridge (Greens), a Palestinian student (Lena), unionist Arthur Rorris from Port Kembla, Sue Wareham and David Perkins (IPAN).  They all spoke well; Arthur Rorris spectacularly well.  There's plenty of informed discussion on the likely failure of AUKUS, of rising costs and lack of planning or that current bugbear, lost sovereignty, or crowding out expenditure and concerns on climate, housing and more and an interesting view of AUKUS as a lead to US nuclear submarine bases and nuclear storage in Australia.  Of course, the future is hard to predict but the argument seemed reasonable given recently established bases for US Marines and B52s in the North and the likelihood that the US won't have enough subs to sell us.  In the meantime, do we pay for construction of bases and subs?  Of course, we know so little of all this, as did Labor when they signed on after only 2 hours with marketer Morrison.  And did he have something to sell!  Think "I don't think, I know".  Not that I know but it seems pretty clear to me that AUKUS is a costly shocker so I was there even if very few others were.

IPAN Canberra held a NO to AUKUS rally at Parliament House as part of the National Action Week against AUKUS.

All comes in twos

Today is the day of the Voice referendum vote (written 14 Oct but published 15 Oct, so the outcome remains unknown if predicted).  It's quite cloudy and dark and windy.  Not too pleasant a day, but not raining.  I walk to the local primary school to vote with our two dogs.  They are stubborn and slow but not too bad this day despite the distance.  There are two sides of the vote, of course, Yes and No, and we've heard lots on that over recent months.  Coming in there were two reps plugging their positions but none too intrusive.  A middle aged man wore the No t-shirt; a younger woman wore the Yes t-shirt.  They both responded to our dogs (they are cute; it's common) and the woman offered to care for them while I went to vote.  There were some other dogs tied up so I took her offer.  Nice to see they were civil enough and we could all chat about dogs.  I handed over the dogs and some treats.  Voting was quicker than usual.  Maybe I chose the time well or most were off to MOAD = Old Parliament House to vote.  Certainly voting there would be interesting.  I came back and the two chatted with me, about how the dogs went, how he'd had a long hair as a kid, how dachshunds were bred to hunt badgers, how they'd got a treat.  Then a walk home.  I'm awaiting an expected win by the No-s.  I remember the last referendum, on the Republic, and how Howard had managed that one and how the Republican movement had split.  Like this time.  And how "don't know, vote no" is a mighty river to cross.  For something so little and so undemanding, so powerless.  So what of the twos?  First up is two choices, Yes or No, an inevitability but a demanding hill to climb for any change, especially with two opposing political sides taken.  Second is disagreement on each side, especially the call for a more radical position that results in no change, so no Voice but also no Treaty.  Third is our two dogs and the pleasure of seeing the local reps for Yes and No able to talk to each other.  It's a sign of a relatively healthy democracy and country even while others despair.  Fourth is the two most recent referendums that have failed and how they have choked our ability or readiness to attempt constitutional change (you can add a third referendum under Hawke that also became a political football).  Maybe a fifth, for the ex-British colonies that have found some agreement with their indigenous peoples (Australia is one of the only Commonwealth countries without a treaty with its First Nations peoples  ATNS) and ex-British colonies that remain with British royalty as their head of state (Commonwealth realms Wikipedia).  I just wonder if the old joke of Britain getting rid of the monarchy before Australia will come to pass.  Thus was my outing this morning to vote.  Sadly I missed a pic of our Yes and No reps with our dogs so just a pic of Truffles and Chopper in their more normal habitat.

PS. Here's my recent letter to the Editor, Canberra Times (28 Sep 2023) relevant to the Voice, if slightly tongue in cheek: "Maybe we need more voices to Parliament, not fewer.  The Aboriginal Voice will have no power and presumably its arguments and requests will be reported with its own Hansard and Government and Parliament will make open decisions informed by this input.  But there are others with access to Ministers and pollies of which we know virtually nothing.  Why not create a Big Business Voice to Parliament so we know when and what they are asking for.  And why not others for miners, private schools, property developers, banks, professional services, unions, lobbyists.  Any other suggestions?"

PPS.  It's morning after the Referendum as I write this.  I am not surprised but I am disappointed.  What thoughts?  The ACT is the only area (not state, but territory, so somewhat impotent given the constitution) that voted for the Voice at individual and community level (~2/3 Yes).  Every other state and NT voted No and overall Australians voted ~2/3 No.  It's noted the ACT is the youngest and most educated population and this is some measure of why I like it here (despite the tram!).  As for politics, Albanese spoke of being "ambitious".  Surely, a Voice, an advisory committee, with no power is not ambitious (stop and think: how much less could our Indigenous peoples have asked for?).  It reminds me of Labor's climate action and more.  Maybe, ultimately, it's a winning strategy but it's disappointing in the meantime and I can only hope we don't lose it all from being too meek in the interim.  As for Dutton, his call for reviews on child sex abuse and expenditure smacks of blaming the underdog and he's laid plenty of blame, especially on Albanese.  All pretty obviously political to my ears.  Given recent politics here and overseas, all this is not unexpected.  And as for the radical No-s, what now?  If you can't get a powerless advisory committee in place, what can you achieve from a position dependent on 97% of others?  And as for our media and think tanks (both Warren Mundine ["symbolic declaration of war"] and Jacinta Nampijinpa Price ["... no ongoing negative impacts of colonisation"] are associated with the Centre for Independent Studies) and broader politics, I tend to desperation as with much else these days.  But desperation is easy: what action did I take?  Not much was required here in the ACT, but I was surprised by the misinformed elsewhere and did my little to carry out my "talking cure" (see The Pots!).  I doubt it worked.  And I did write my letter to the editor.  So Australia wakes up once again unchanged with the naysayers claiming just the approach was the problem, then presumably applauding their works at conservative conferences or on relevant boards.  Australia's basically a good place and Australians are basically good people, but it's easy given our wealth and we can be fearful and untrusting and so easily misled.  Referenda are big symbols so they can stop us in our tracks to ask of us and our future.  Our Brexit?  If so, just what is our future?

Standing talking

It was called What would you stand for?  and it was a record and investigation into Isobelle Carmody's year of protest.  It was different.  As many, she has protested in marches and more but this was new, more personal, just one person standing with a sign for an hour somewhere in Australia or elsewhere in the world, and open to talk to passing people.  It's a response, perhaps in frustration, to the lack of change by politics (think million-person marches against nuclear arms, Bridge march for reconciliation, marches against Iraq war and more that had no effect), to simmering anger and conspiracies, the immense urgency of climate and more.  Isobelle's approach was to be open to talk with individuals.  It's a valid and strong response and admirable.  And she was at Gorman House documenting such action.  Just a room full of pics of her and signs and others, a short presentation describing the actions and a chance to make your own posters and be photographed as some action.  The attendees were surprisingly mature, as grey hair is so often present at SS4C marches, and no doubt committed (Extinction Rebellion was represented).  I chatted with Isobelle and she was open and joyous.  It was something of a protest of my own to come from a reception at Government House in a suit, but she was obviously welcoming of any conversations and enjoyed the discord.  Talking is a strong action but a small influence and it takes time and time is not too available but I can only wish Isobelle and fellow travellers well.  Dark days indeed.  PS, I had written a song with a parallel theme called the Talking cure on my latest album Sky vs weather.  Have a listen below.

Isobelle Carmody (author, activist) presented an installation and event at Gorman House.

The talking cure / The Pots

Making (culture) wars

Here's my submission to the NCA on the War Memorial development.  It includes plenty that's outside their domain, but I felt I should say it.  It's been a tawdry example of culture warring and influence and looking after mates to the exclusion of others and an obvious display of our current way of making politics.  FWIW, here's what I wrote.  It will be well received in Canberra (597 of 600 submissions were against the AWM redevelopment) but of little interest outside.

---------------

I wish to state my opposition to extensive redevelopment of the Australian War Memorial. I have these points to make.

1. The redevelopment will turn the AWM from a meditative space to a museum of war.  My comment is this.  I remember travelling in Europe and visiting a war museum in Spain.  I found the experience distant and war-mongering and deeply unsatisfying.  Alternatively, I have visited the AWM and found it touching and relevant.  Sadly, that relevance is dropping.  My recent visits have given me a different feeling, more war-promotional.  Not least the fact that I sat in a theatre named after a major supplier of weaponry.  I fear for this change and feel it undermines the sanctity of the traditional, much loved building.

2. I have visited the AWM annexe and consider it quite apt for display of large military tools and materials.  This serves the purposes of a museum without undermining the sanctity of the memorial space.

3.  I fear the culture war aspects of what is spoken as our "Anzackery".  Large monies have been spent on WW1 commemorations.  Australia overspent the next largest spending country, Germany, by many times, ~4x).  Now the same government seeks to spend a similar amount on this AWM redevelopment while ever-ready to weep for Anzacs (viz. Scott Morrison) and undermine proper military processes (Dutton and awards for an SAS division).  Note also the claims of free speech but the readiness to question expressions when it suits (viz. SBS broadcaster and around a recent ANZAC day).

4.  The deep meaning and importance of the AWM as a historical building and as a representation of the mourning of Australians, esp after WW1/WW2.  Included in this is a real questioning of war and Australia's readiness to attend others' wars.  WW1 is a prime example of doing others' business where the business itself was deeply questionable.  Vietnam is widely recognised that way too.  There are similar others.  And let us not forget the Australian colonial wars which the AWM refuses to recognise. They may not be formally recognised, but neither were several other wars by Parliament.

5. The expenditure of vast monies on changing the nature of the Memorial at the very time that other national institutions (NGA, NPG, NLA, NMA, as well as other major institutions, ABC, NAA) suffer such funding problems.  I used to work at the National Library.  From my time (~1990), the staffing has reduced from ~650 to 365 ( https://www.nla.gov.au/facts-and-figures )

6. The broad public disquiet and open disagreement with this development, the lack of real, honest, open consultation by government and the implications of such a process for our democracy.  This at a time that democracy is widely seen to be suffering throughout the world and while crony capitalism is under serious discussion as a source of corruption of federal political processes (viz. climate, media and more).

I trust you will give due consideration to my concerns and hope you will decide against approval of further work on the AWM redevelopment.

(One spelling and one capitalisation correction made from the original)

(No)Show trials

 

It's not the first time I've gone out for Collaery and co. or at Parliament House.  It's an action of an ageing cohort.  Virtually n'ere a millennial amongst them all.  Lots of grey hair.  But we have time and we have history in marching.  Often with little effect.  The VN Moratoriums worked, in the end, and perhaps the Springboks tours.  But I've marched with the millions in Rome and London and no outcome, against WMDs and Iraq and what is now (and then, BTW!) obvious lies or misleadings.  The Bridge marches haven't led to Reconciliation but the people are changing.  So it is with Climate.  But the powers are stolid and stubborn and the times change too quickly for peoples' experience and they are just too ignorant or uninterested or misled or just uninterested and comfy anyway.  But I was out again.  So were a few others I knew.  And a retired DFAT staff member who I met at a dinner party the next evening.  Canberra is a small world.  I can't reiterate the whole story adequately, but suffice to say secret trials, endless secrecy through National Security legislation and political fiat.  A few quotes from the day will inform:  "When the rule of law returns to this country" (Bernard Collaery); "This government is every bit as bad as you imagine" (David McBride).  Or from a mate, speaking more broadly: " The Coalition is avoiding the hard but necessary work of strategic policymaking. Its energy policy, driven by climate denialism, is a shambles that has required state governments to take the lead. Its innovation policy is moving us backwards. Its manufacturing policy is limited to tax breaks for capital investment, only bringing forward future spending. The intellectual shallowness, policy nonsense, hypocrisy, spin, under-delivery and flagrant incompetence will continue until next year."  And then to hear, just today, that Witness K, behind a screen, pleading guilty, suffering mental illness, court hidden with  blacked out windows and cameras, after appropriated passports, after years of trials and pursuits, to be given just 3 months jail fully suspended.  What?  For this vast threat to our National Security?  Who are you kidding?  This was a whistle blower, a respected officer who saw something inappropriate and went through channels and got permission to inform and yet, this.  Our secret state grows.  Not to protect the public, for we know the story, but to protect government and mates.  Not the first whistle blower to reveal actions that are illegal or unethical.  And not the first whistle blower to suffer such a fate.  If we would only consider and learn.  Like Greta, I want you to panic.  But we, as electors, will probably return this dangerously veering government.  Thanks to influence and money and ideology and media and self-interest ...  and again, money.  Here's another quote to mull over:  "Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance"* (HL Mencken).

The Alliance Against Political Prosecutions convened a rally on Parliament House lawns.

* Thanks to Ian Warden for this Mencken quote, although in a totally different context - the ABC Classic 100 Countdown! (Democracy rarely music to one's ears / Ian Warden. IN Canberra Times, Sat 19 Jun 2021, Panorama, p.2-3)

Background reading from The Conversation, take your pick: collaery+witness and/or whistleblower

And more.  Sr Susan Connelly's excellent article following this very demo: Adventures in incompetence : Witness K sentenced / Susan Connelly IN Pearls & Irritations, viewed 21 June 2021 

Demo muso

Well, there was some music to report.  It preceded the Women's march as a lead in.  First up was a set with grunge rock band Matriarch.  I was mightily amused by their byline and couldn't resist the listen "...four 'mature' women who should know better. Matriarch have arcane knowledge on living a life of regrets, ageing disgracefully and not giving a f***. Come get enlightened."  They played nicely rocky numbers with social themes and not always too softly spoken.  Titles like: Sucks to be a girl; Messy house; Mansplain; Four mature women who should know better; Too much oil.  A band with themes and attitude; rock guitars and pushy vox and thumpy drums.  Great.  I liked it.  And just before the women's march, Monica Moore singing the feminist classic, Helen Reddy's I am woman, with guitar accompaniment.  That got some cheers!  And one last song, a solo Aboriginal voice singing a short but haunting piece passed down through generations of women.  Sadly, I missed her name.

Matriarch are Ana Key (vocals, guitar), Glenda Harvey (guitar), Lee Grunwald (bass) and Leanne Thompson (drums).  Monica Moore (vocals) sang I am woman accompanied by acoustic guitar.  They sang outside Parliament House for the Women's March4Justice.

Again a demo duo

You have to hand it to the LNP Howard and post- that they offer plenty of opportunities to protest.  It's strange when they actively do so little (think ScoMo's winning but scant policies for the last election).  Hopefully our voting public is putting 2-and-2 together but I don't have great faith.  How do they do it?  Stay stubborn, refuse to budge; let issues pass over with a 24-hour news turnover; blame others, training the public to see both sides as the same.  With a little help to and from various friends.  Issues?  Women and secret trials are those today, meaning this 24-hour cycle, but there are others: climate-coal-gas, refugees, reconciliation, water.  Or the sheer incompetence despite claims of superior economic management: NBN, subs, EVs, renewables.  Or wayward ways which are increasingly frequent and ignored: sports rorts; water rights, GBRF; Manila; the Clover Moore fake doc; $2k per month Internet; French and Italian Au pairs.  And the endless secrecy: on-water matters; national security; Commercial in confidence.  Even non-legality: Robodebt.  The list goes on.  And everything a tax, or every job needs saving, except when it's not what their mates want, then they can be mashed.  Oh, I get angry, so I need to do something, so I go to demos, FWIW.  Two this day: Assange and Women.  It can be satisfying, if frustrating; hope-laden, if unlikely to bring change.  I despair on climate, anyway, so I fully expect existential dangers just around the corner.  No not next week (if you ignore fires or drought or floods or storms or lost GBR that are with us now, but those we can, partly, recover from ... for now) but unrecoverable within decades or a few centuries.  You don't win an argument with physics, but our stubborn government is doing its darndest.  Silly, short-termist and woefully unethical.  Even exporting our climate heroes (?) to the OECD (oh, what of his new words of climate commitment?  I say "know them by their actions, not by their words").  But at least with a day of demos we can gather in hope for a while, sometimes, and this government offers us many reasons to demonstrate.

The Assange demo was small and grey and much the same crew spoke as last time, and as cogently as last time.  Bernard Collaery (himself subject to a questionable and largely secret trial) touched me with a lament on a country changed since his youth asking "what country will Julian return to?".  As for the Women's March4 Justice, it was big and impressive and black (people were asked to wear black) and angry and had some great posters.  ScoMo may ignore Collaery/Assange but I feel this is a much closer and bigger danger for him.  The question is, will his deceptive lightweight PR-spin still work.  My guess is the public is starting to see through it.  But maybe I'm wrong.  We'll see.

HomeRun4JulianAssange and Women's March4Justice were staged at Parliament House, for the first day of the new session of Parliament.

Whose day

Ah, the annual culture wars over Australia Day.  The day only dates back to the mid-1990s anyway, so it's hardly great tradition.  It is a view of Australia that's kosher for the glass fully-full crew, though.  Along with the Queen and the Union Jack (not our union; rather it's a reference to the sun-never-sets empire that is now set).  Not that Australia is really so bad, but as lucky people sharing luck (as in mining!) we should be open to the less lucky.  But increasingly we aren't.  Since the new reaction of Howard, we've stubbornly stuck to old tropes, to the future cost of our kids, not least with climate.  As for our own indigenous people, for along time they have not been the lucky ones.  So we walked in the Invasion Day march to Parliament house.  I was surprised how many others did too.  I was not quite so enamoured of the speeches although I admit I caught very little given distant speakers using mere loudhailers. There was anger which is understandable but not politically effective.  The bikies arriving on Harleys, parking up front and presenting was a challenge.  Not that I could hear what they said either.  I have no doubt that land was never ceded (that's a fact) but the endless chants of always was, always will be is difficult, sounding to my ear of sole possession, but then I don't warm to chants.  On the other hand, the invitation to common love of land and the welcoming of non-indigenous supporters was more politic and well received.  It doesn't take many generations to come to love this land.  I could particularly understand the anger with the unrepresentative crew behind, in upper and lower chambers, and their lack of consultation, and I found it interesting that not one pollie was in attendance, so it was said.  Not morals but money talks, especially recently, on cultural issues, climate and more.  Recent reports from the Centre for Public Integrity indicate that.  So I felt this march was a huge success in numbers, but just a little uncomfortable in effect.  But given history, there's plenty for we non-indigenous to understand and remember, and no need to go back 60,000 years to view indigenous loss and disappointments.  One example was PM Turnbull's fairly recent misrepresentation of the Voice as a third house of Parliament.  Strange given the limited demands made for the Voice to Parliament: to me, it seemed so lacking in real power.  But now ScoMo seems more slippery in communication and more dangerous in hidden action.  But the levees will break, for climate, indigenous issues and the rest; hopefully not too late for the survival of civilisations, indigenous and non-.  Just remember the joy of the day of the Apology and imagine if Australia could surpass these eternal road blocks.  I doubt we'd ever return to the social laboratory of the past, but perhaps we could just recognise scientific and cultural truths once more and so move on.  That would be a good first step.  Our people do it reasonably well; it's our leaders, influenced as they are, who fail.

The Canberra Invasion Day march commemorated indigenous experiences otherwise celebrated as Australia Day.  Marchers walked from the Tent Embassy to the steps of the new Parliament House.

Day of demos

If you listen to my recorded music (under the pseudonym "The Pots" on Spotify et.al.) you'll realise I have political opinions.  Fairly strong and, at least I think, fairly ethical.  Also, I think, reasonably informed by good sources providing guidance from evidence.  Now, we have had some dog days of late.  The bushfires and Covid and ScoMo/LNP's response to rebuilding the economy and generally to climate and secrecy and security and much more.  But maybe there's some hope.  Trump got the flick and he seems to be strangely restrained in the face of defeat.  Biden is no arch-lefty (clearly to the right of our own revered Liberal Menzies, as is our contemporary Labor party) but at least he's not so impetuous and ill-informed and has at least some respect for truth and belief that it exists and we can at least approach it.  So there's some mild, distant hope.  Thus, I embarked on a day of demos. 

First up, a morning fling outside Parliament in support of Zali Steggall's climate bill.  Not a big crew, mostly retired.  Strange that, but the kids have much less time these days, what with flexible work and dearer housing and the rest.  I was handed a sign to hold and it worked for me "Coal ... too stupid", but I wish I'd made one "Invest in Gas / What could possibly go wrong".  Well, lots, given Europe, US, Japan, South Korea, China (others too) are committed to give up on fossil fuels within 30 (China 40) years.  So it's not just survival of civilisation, but even survival of economy.  That's changing minds!

Second up, a lunchtime session outside the ACT Courts in support of Bernard Collaery and the subjects of secret trials.  I wish to say justice, but the essence of secrecy is the denial of justice.  Thus is the way of an increasing state of security, the primacy of Home Affairs and the rest.  Our local luminary journos spoke, Jack Waterford and Mark Kenny, with hosting presumably by host Sister Susan Connelly.

I took the opportunity to promote my albums to the fellow travellers at the demos.  If you've heard my albums, you'd recognise all these themes: climate, broken politics, Covid.  If not, catch up with these.  In the meantime, remember Gramsci: "Pessimism of the intellect; optimism of the will".

The Pots is a project of Bassist EP of Canberra.  Here's some listening:
On Broken politics > Spotify
On Climate > Spotify
On Collaery et al > Spotify
On Trump's Bible photo-op > Spotify

My indulgence

There's a line from Sting on the 1980 album Zenyatta Mondatta by The Police that has always stuck on my brain.  It's a great melody with a hypnotic endless rhythm and with considerable depth: "When the World Is Running Down, You Make the Best of What's Still Around".  It's in this light that I released my third home-studio album by The Pots, called Pumpkin discomforts.  The first two albums had themes of climate then Covid-19.  Pumpkin has the theme of broken politics.  Plenty of anger with disillusion and despair and some Catholic guilt for being comfortable amongst it all.  I'm getting better with various tech things and perhaps with conception and implementation with  more experience, but that's for you to judge.  I invite you to have a listen.

Have a listen to Pumpkin discomforts / The Pots on Spotify, YouTube Music or some other streaming site.

The pleasure of displeasure

It's hard to laugh at the state of the world these days, not least the state of Australian politics, but it's easier when you are in an obviously like-minded group. Even more so when you realise you'd missed a few things that they'd caught. That's a fairly rare occurrence for me, as I keep abreast of the news, but I'd missed that Pauline Hanson had mistaken (or misspoken?) NRMA for NRA. ScoMo mostly doesn't make such errors although his lump of coal in Parliament will never be lived down. But that was another political year, not 2019, which was what Shortis and Simpson were serenading and recounting. They are a great local treasure, or perhaps Bungendorian pleasure, but not known widely like the Wharf Review. Not quite as flash professional but equally witty. It was a sad story they had to tell, the political story of 2019, and the laughs were tragicomedy rather than belly, until their spoonerism routine came towards the end of the night. How clever was that! ... to quote another theme of the political year. Aptly they started with just that, singing "How good is Australia / How good is 2019" with ScoMo providing the first notes. As the marketer he is, he'd no doubt consider this a great success, his line searing into the thought patterns of the country. The next song was of the drought, again, searing into the thought of the country, with no thanks to the LNP. Then on through the characters, Bill and Albo and Trump. I won't give away the joke, but the decision on the relevant element for ScoMo, after he was dubbed "Man of Titanium" by Trump was a great laugh. Folau got in there with a Mark Twain quote I'd never heard "Go to Heaven for the climate, to Hell for the company". Then on through the Prince of Whales (apparently another mistake, this time by Trump, and also one I'd missed). Then horses and 11,000 climate scientists and Hawkie's demise and Boris/Brexit, of course, and the election and the surplus and School excursions to Parliament and Greta and a few shorties on Medievac, NSW Abortion bill, NBN and an encore on their home town, inviting ScoMo to Bungendor-ière. And lessons, too, for Canberra locals who drive through, about the bears and that mysterious hubcap. Well, I never! We ended in uproarious laughter but the year remains what it was. Bad and probably just getting worse.

Shortis and Simpson are John Shortis (vocals, piano, ukelele) and Moya Simpson (vocals) and they performed their annual political satire show at Smiths.

Be fearful but act

Just a record of an important demonstration outside Parliament House: for Whistleblowers and Press Freedom. It's an important topic and we have a series of danger signs in the form of real threats to real people in court right now. Look up the cases of Witness K and Bernard Collaery and of David McBride and of Richard Boyle; muse on Julian Assange; look up historical names like Allan Kessing and Donald McKay and Andrew Wilkie and Toni Hoffman; read Catholic nun Susan Connelly and journalist Jack Waterford; listen to the Parliamentary words of Sarah Hanson-Young and Rex Patrick; think of the 80+ pieces of national security legislation that have been passed by LNP and a meek Labor opposition since 9/11; think of your own privacy and the government's ability to follow your phone calls and web visits and the rest for the last 2 years, stored by your ISP at your expense with no judicial oversight (used by local councils, even) and new plans for a national database of our photos and of usage-creep with facial recognition in Qld. Then think to the responsibility of the German people for Nazism (Hitler was voted in, of course); muse on the famed words of Martin Niemoller: "First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Socialist. Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Trade Unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak for me" and muse of Minister for Home Affairs Dutton for a minute and take stock. It's too easy to fall into the trap of calling fascism (we are certainly not there and not the worst!) but I note there were several mentions of creeping authoritarianism at this rally and already we know less of government (FOI is more and more difficult) while Government computing knows more of us. This rally was associated with the academic Honest History group. So, who do you trust? And fist up, how do you know who to trust? But first, to save Collaery and K and McBride is the first step. And K/Collaery's sin? Revealing that our Government (under Howard) bugged East Timor government offices (was it the Cabinet Room?) to gain advantage in commercial matters on sea borders and oil/gas. Confirm the details, but the essence is correct. Our Government? Australia? Our security apparatus? There's much more but be aware and be loud or prepare to be fearful. This is our government? This is our country? Sadly, it is.

The Rally for Press Freedom was held in front of Parliament House. Speakers included Andrew Wilkie MP, Dr Sue Wareham, Sister Susan Connelly, Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, Jack Waterford and Rod Campbell.

On Inequality

They asked for anyone with questions to state their Name and Union. This was an introduction to the new President of the ACTU and a session on Inequality. I didn't ask a question, but those comfortable with this convention did, eg, "[Name], CPSU Retired". It amused me. As did the ongoing convention within the Union movement of using the term "Comrade". It jangles to my ear and dates the movement but it's obviously a tradition of note for those within. But those are trivial issues. The main matters were to meet Michele O'Neil, the new ACTU President (of one week) and inequality. I warmed to her. She smiles easily; she speaks well and with conviction; she has a Canberra connection and friends (lived here 15 years from age 8). She talked of her time representing the Textile and Clothing workers, well known for their poor treatment - working from home; paid low or under-minimum wage; no conditions or paid leave; poor treatment - and of their Union's response. And interestingly, of the similarity of their plight and the nature of the current gig economy. Then on to the session on Inequality. The chair spoke very strongly and deeply personally of her experiences (from Iran, including the death of her father while medicines were not available due to sanctions). Then Emma Dawson of Per Capita think tank on relevant stats and John Falzon (CEO of St Vinnie's) on listening to the people, inequality as "not an accident" and the secret weapon of "solidarity". Michele reprised some of her earlier introduction and added more on wage theft, homelessness, working poverty and responses: structural change and a rebalance of power for workers through winning the argument with the public and government. There were questions on economic mobility, UBI (not popular with this group), the Union movement, engaging young people, CDP, benefits of work. I could only agree about the core issue of inequality (not alone there) and warm to social democratic responses. I could accept this is a time of transition in technology (I add, end-times for climate) so ructions are inevitable. I can easily question the unbalanced approaches to capital(-ism) and individuality and worry of our politics and its influences and distribution of power in society. But at the same time, I'm in two minds that the traditional Union movement is the response. But then, the Greens can be pretty blind to class and there's lots of self-serving wealth out there to unduly influence politics and a very limited media to inform us. So the Unions may remain our best path. However it happens, it's clear we need change, massive and quick. So best of luck to Michele and John and Emma ... and us.

Michele O'Neil, Emma Dawson and John Falzon spoke at an Inequality forum organised by the CPSU.

Tragedies

The concert was called the Art of Rhetoric. It was essentially the words of various politicians put to music by composers Robert Davidson and Gordon Hamilton and performed by RD's band Topology and the combined choirs TAV (The Australian Voices) and our local Luminescence Chamber Choir under GH. The first half was less effecting. There was considerable minimalist four-to-the-floor regularity, repeating lines, occasional jazz improvs or written conversations between instruments (not least all the strings, violin, viola and bass). But the key was the treatment of speech. RD would listen to the patterns, the phrasings, the moving pitch and tempo to write a line to accompany selected lines of speech or sometimes just accompany with a wash of sound or an aural counterpoint. The first half featured this style, with words from David Malouf, Jessie Street, Charles Kingsford-Smith and Menzies and some ever-sad words of Abbott. That was the start of the tragic story recited from Australian politics. I chatted a day later with someone who was there, who had worked in Parliament House, and we could only bemoan our recent inability to deal with issues. It seems worse now, but there in some ways the Singing Politician recounted a history of tragedy with little light. There was one of Tony Abbott with one of his simplistic slogans, "No no no". Note, ever in three; ever a slogan. He understood rhythm if not the ease and costs of destruction versus the difficulty and hope of construction: think car industry, govt agencies that fell in one swoop, Julia Gillard for that matter. There was Menzies, the sainted one: we all know the quote about entering the war because the mother country had, but there was also melocholy in his further words of a price to be paid. Billy Hughes about Gallipoli, the Dark hour, and John Curtin about the war approaching Australia and John Scullin, sworn in only 2 days before the Stock market crash of 1929 that ushered in the Depression and, indirectly, another war. And Fraser with his infamous line about the easy life or otherwise: this was done 4/4 minimalist with polyrhythms. The Dismissal was the biggest work, using multiple voices for a long rendition. I hadn't remembered a younger Keating line, "a completely unprincipled act", but I did remember the chants of "We want Gough". Also here was choral accompaniment with a remelodicised God save the Queen: interesting. I hadn't remembered Bob Hawke, then ACTU head, on the day of the dismissal calming workers with a warning of a "snowball into violence". That was admirable (and prescient as we watch democratic politics crumble under right-instransigence and growing inequality and climate and the rest). Also Noel Pearson in his euology to Whitlam recognising Gough's good work for Aboriginals: "The reward for public life is public progress". Howard just appeared as a cricket tragic seeing politics as a parallel game: "politics and cricket ... playing the game, yeah". There was the profundity and truth-telling of Keating's Redfern speech: "the problem begins with us ... it begins in an act of recognition that it was us that did the dispossession ... we took the children from their mothers". [NB: how could you not despair after Stolen Children, with institutional child abuse and deaths in custody and Manus/Nauru as emotional darts to our civic hearts]. There was a fascinating play with the Rudd Apology speech, where two words were extended to several minutes and sung by the choir and recorded, then, live, played back, faster and faster until we heard those words again: "We apologise". Then Gillard "Not now, not ever". I sat thinking of the young women singing those words and how they would relate to this recent feminist history. Then a summary piece that featured various boorish and barbaric quotes: I'm a fixer; No cuts to education, health; the recession Australia had to have; suppository of all wisdom; PM Trumble; Please explain; People have a right to be bigots; by 1990, no child will be living in poverty; shirtfront; kids overboard. Then a final encore on Trump and "total political correctness". So I listened and mighty was the playing, the composing, the voices, not least Luminescence who got their part together in no time, but more so I found myself despairing of this country and its uninformed self-image: forever now "Great" or "Fair go" in the talk of pollies but the home of climate denial, inequality, misinformation and more, once the light of the world with emancipation and the rest, now this timorous server of wealth and denier of evidence. This is music but more. Excellent for the political tragics amongst us.


Topology, The Australian Voices and Luminescence Chamber Singers performed music by Robert Davidson and Gordon Hamilton, mostly on political themes, at the National Gallery of Australia. Topology comprised John Babbage (soprano, alto sax), Robert Davidson (bass), Bernaud Hoey (viola), Therese Milanovic (piano) and Christa Powell (violin). Gordon Hamilton (conductor) led the combined choirs.

Out for energy

Mark it down to my boomer heritage but I like a good demo. This one had the biggest of reasons to attend: climate change and the survival of civilisation and jazz (with music and the arts more generally) certainly locates itself amongst civilisation. The event was a COAG meeting on energy policy with implications for renewables. I was amused to be invited by several organisations for a last-minute rally at the Convention Centre, not least by AYCC (Australian Youth Climate Coalition). The turn-up wasn't large. I wonder if rallies are a thing of the past, but perhaps they maintain some relevance. At least there were journos and cameras and Megan said she saw me on SBS News (although not ABC). I joked with others about our ages, given the AYCC invitation, and got wry replies from both young and old. I caught up with a few mates, not least one retired Exec whom I admire for intelligence and openness and another who's an ardent campaigner. Simon Corbell spoke and I realised he's a hero of this group, as the architect of ACT's 100%-renewables by 2020 policy; he's about to retire. I was mightily impressed by one activist speaker and disheartened if amused by another who could obviously talk underwater and had mastered the demands of political communications (and chants): those things are probably necessary but I find them unsatisfying. It was just a small turnout but maybe it served a useful purpose and I enjoyed some banter and conversation with some aware and concerned people. And in the end, Corbell seemed to consider the outcome of a commitment by ministers to an energy policy which was "reliable, sustainable and affordable" was a good outcome. Climate is an almighty political stoush, but I expect most of our pollies accept the science and recognise the dangers and are doing something on the quiet, even if it's likely to be too little and too late. We'll know soon enough: the reckoning is coming much quicker than we had recently expected.

AYCC and 350.org held a rally outside a meeting of COAG ministers on renewable energy.

Enough already

Some people just can't get enough, even after the longest election campaign in yonks. Obviously, I'm one of them because I attended the Australia Institute Election wrapup. It was hosted by Ebony Bennett of the AI with journos Gabrielle Chan and Malcolm Farr. I realised after some time that I had perhaps had enough. I had mostly heard all these thoughts and mostly agreed with them. I cavilled once at MF; that may have been my partisanship, but I don't think so. Eight weeks should be enough for anyone, so this will be a very quick run through. The public was angry, disinterested and unengaged (some journos and pollies felt the same). Disengaged is how Turnbull wanted it. The close outcome is "not such a bad thing". It was a gruelling test for journos (especially for those who had to travel the pollie buses) if not as intense as shorter campaigns. Given it was winter, there were colds and flus. Turnbull had no fun, but Shorten gained energy and won the campaign if not the election. Issues came and went. Labor's issues touched voters. On the Lib side, but what was the role of the budget, did they really "have a plan" and why was their central, almost only, plan to hand $50b in tax relief to companies. [It's not as if trickle down has been a resounding success over recent decades]. Interestingly, MF suggested Scott Morrison now wants to get the whole budget through, so "no more Mr Nice Guy" [is that something new?]. The Senate outcome was "not envisaged at all". Expect deals with Labor and Greens and Xenophon. MF accepted that the Senate voting system is improved, if this Senate composition is worse than before. Obviously, the major party vote declined and this is international (think Trump, Brexit). Stability was a big issue on voters' minds. Questions. ABCC not mentioned during the campaign [well, just a very little when prompted]: it was "just an excuse" (MF). Someone suggested minor parties lacked media coverage, but the presenters disagreed (Di Natale, Oakeshott, McGowan, Windsor were fairly commonly covered). The Greens went backwards, and some "characters" (Hanson, Hinch) are "there for a good time and a long time". Bullying is not likely to work for this Senate; it "certainly didn't work for the voters" [referring to Turnbull's last minute argument not to vote for small parties]. The result can be seen as a correction after the 2013 election. One Nation go directly to voters; they were "very defensive" when GC approached them before the election. What would have happened if Julia Gillard wasn't "backstabbed"? "I have no idea; no-one will ever know" (MF). I had problems with MF arguing that Libs failed with content and message: he seemed to suggest they had policies, but what were they other than a big tax reduction for business and an unjustified promise of trickle down benefits? Turnbull was failing months before when he argued for trust in government then was all over the place on policies [remember the "thought bubble" (not originally my words) policies that changed daily at COAG?] Is Turnbull under the Right wing or just gutless? "Still waiting to see" (GC). Predictions? See more coal [not sure I understood this message]; Libs will [have to] talk more with Labor and Greens (GC); Turnbull will [have to] be more decisive, the quick action on a Royal Commission on NT Youth Justice is an example (MF). Enough already...

Ebony Bennett discussed the Federal Election 2016 with journalists Gabrielle Chan and Malcolm Farr at Politics in the Pub for the Australia Institute.