moops Posted October 13, 2020 Report Share Posted October 13, 2020 (edited) if you are really fussed about my past post I will grudgingly dedicate my weekend to satiate your thirst if it makes you feel better. Understand that there are 3 guys taking the Victorian government (Labor (can't even spell)) to court, there must be a precident. I listen, I am not right wing or left wing, I judge by Merritt and what is good for me. I have voted liberal, labour, greens and Democrat. Second paragraph was nonsense. Third paragraph made no sense to me, sorry. I might look into the book. Seriously I think most of my posts have been government links, I think for myself after seeing data. You are free to debate the findings, you are free to have an opinion, you are not free to have your own facts. Ask yourself this, I am in the construction business, why don't I support Dictator Dan? Edited October 13, 2020 by moops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 13, 2020 Report Share Posted October 13, 2020 (edited) On 12/10/2020 at 5:55 PM, malloy said: It probably doesn't help either that those sources tend to refer to the Constitution and each state's Constitution interchangeably without truly understanding what they are quoting/citing (which when cited tends to be a subsection or paragraph out of context). You could be right. Although I am sure I only look at federal, I could be wrong though. Edited October 13, 2020 by moops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted October 13, 2020 Report Share Posted October 13, 2020 8 hours ago, moops said: if you are really fussed about my past post I will grudgingly dedicate my weekend to satiate your thirst if it makes you feel better. Understand that there are 3 guys taking the Victorian government (Labor (can't even spell)) to court, there must be a precident. I listen, I am not right wing or left wing, I judge by Merritt and what is good for me. I have voted liberal, labour, greens and Democrat. Second paragraph was nonsense. Third paragraph made no sense to me, sorry. I might look into the book. Seriously I think most of my posts have been government links, I think for myself after seeing data. You are free to debate the findings, you are free to have an opinion, you are not free to have your own facts. Ask yourself this, I am in the construction business, why don't I support Dictator Dan? There is no precedent.This is why a Monash Uni professor has called the basis for the challenge a novel approach. Don't forget that Clive Palmer is also taking the WA government to the High court and they have not expedited the case. 7 hours ago, moops said: You could be right. Although I am sure I only look at federal, I could be wrong though. The state constitution is divided in two sections: first part can only altered by referendum, second part can be amended by a vote in the lower and upper house. Interestingly enough the state constitution up until the Bracks' government was never subject to a referendum, it was always subject to parliamentary vote. AFAIK in the 18/19th centuries this was quite a big debate all around the world as the modern nation states were emerging. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted October 14, 2020 Author Report Share Posted October 14, 2020 On 13/10/2020 at 10:47 PM, moops said: You could be right. Although I am sure I only look at federal, I could be wrong though. Its simply impossible for you to find the things you are mentioning in the Federal Constitution, and TBH these we have a good Constitution is because we dont have crap like this in it... Just look at the USA where those who are Corrupt plead "The 5th" to any question and those who are Nuts "Own a Garage full of Army Guards Guns". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 15, 2020 Report Share Posted October 15, 2020 (edited) 10 hours ago, cadete said: Its simply impossible for you to find the things you are mentioning in the Federal Constitution, and TBH these we have a good Constitution is because we dont have crap like this in it... Just look at the USA where those who are Corrupt plead "The 5th" to any question and those who are Nuts "Own a Garage full of Army Guards Guns". I am going to be working this weekend (Sat and Sunday), probably 14 hrs a day, when i have time. I know what it is, but I don't want to say it without a quote. But I am just a dickhead, so give me some time. On 14/10/2020 at 6:31 AM, NewConvert said: There is no precedent.This is why a Monash Uni professor has called the basis for the challenge a novel approach. Don't forget that Clive Palmer is also taking the WA government to the High court and they have not expedited the case. The state constitution is divided in two sections: first part can only altered by referendum, second part can be amended by a vote in the lower and upper house. Interestingly enough the state constitution up until the Bracks' government was never subject to a referendum, it was always subject to parliamentary vote. AFAIK in the 18/19th centuries this was quite a big debate all around the world as the modern nation states were emerging. The thing is that state constitution cannot contravene or be in opposition to the federal constitution. Edited October 15, 2020 by moops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 15, 2020 Report Share Posted October 15, 2020 Just so Cadete feels exceptionally included, here is SOMETHING. https://www.3aw.com.au/shop-owner-who-opened-against-covid-19-rules-says-he-did-it-for-every-small-business/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 15, 2020 Report Share Posted October 15, 2020 (edited) Fuck me, what is your beef with reguard to our constitution, I got mixed up with someone else, remind me bitch, internet is not my life. I honestly don't know what your beef is, I can't find it? I will find time over the next few days to address your concerns. post them here. I remember saying fuck you I would rather pat my cat, remind me you stupid fuck. I went back to 109 and can't find your grievance. Edited October 15, 2020 by moops 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malloy Posted October 15, 2020 Report Share Posted October 15, 2020 10 hours ago, moops said: Fuck me, what is your beef with reguard to our constitution, I got mixed up with someone else, remind me bitch, internet is not my life. I honestly don't know what your beef is, I can't find it? I will find time over the next few days to address your concerns. post them here. I remember saying fuck you I would rather pat my cat, remind me you stupid fuck. I went back to 109 and can't find your grievance. I am going to throw you a bone, the point of contention I believe was the reference to forced medical procedures. The relevent subsection of the constitution is below that has recently been held out as opposing mandatory vaccinations etc (my emphasis): 51(xxiiiA) the provision of maternity allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances. Section 51 is the section of the Constitution Act that sets out Federal Parliament's legislative powers, the above is one of which. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted October 15, 2020 Author Report Share Posted October 15, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, moops said: Fuck me, what is your beef with reguard to our constitution, I got mixed up with someone else, remind me bitch, internet is not my life. I honestly don't know what your beef is, I can't find it? I will find time over the next few days to address your concerns. post them here. I remember saying fuck you I would rather pat my cat, remind me you stupid fuck. I went back to 109 and can't find your grievance. Its very Simple mate... All the Constitution does as @malloy alluded to is designate what powers the Federal Government has, that is pretty much it. It does contain any of these crazy privileges that you believe it contains for your benefit. Also I love how as all your news sources are usually some dude in a Gym on Facebook that you think a link to 3AW is like throwing down an Opinion Piece written by a Nobel Prize winner in the London fucken Times. Edited October 15, 2020 by cadete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted October 16, 2020 Report Share Posted October 16, 2020 22 hours ago, moops said: I am going to be working this weekend (Sat and Sunday), probably 14 hrs a day, when i have time. I know what it is, but I don't want to say it without a quote. But I am just a dickhead, so give me some time. The thing is that state constitution cannot contravene or be in opposition to the federal constitution. You’re not a dickhead. Just an average bloke wondering what’s the fucks going on. Actually 50 years ago you’d be an ALP voter, but now they hate you. God knows why. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted October 16, 2020 Report Share Posted October 16, 2020 2 hours ago, Shahanga said: You’re not a dickhead. Just an average bloke wondering what’s the fucks going on. Actually 50 years ago you’d be an ALP voter, but now they hate you. God knows why. Absolutely you're not a dickhead. I'm sure that there are many people who don't know that Victoria has a constitution, let alone what's in it, and if they remember Gough Whitlam and Sir John Kerr they have heard of the Commonwealth Constitution but still probably don't know much beyond that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 20, 2020 Report Share Posted October 20, 2020 (edited) On 16/10/2020 at 8:52 AM, malloy said: I am going to throw you a bone, the point of contention I believe was the reference to forced medical procedures. The relevent subsection of the constitution is below that has recently been held out as opposing mandatory vaccinations etc (my emphasis): 51(xxiiiA) the provision of maternity allowances, widows’ pensions, child endowment, unemployment, pharmaceutical, sickness and hospital benefits, medical and dental services (but not so as to authorize any form of civil conscription), benefits to students and family allowances. Section 51 is the section of the Constitution Act that sets out Federal Parliament's legislative powers, the above is one of which. https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/equality-capacity-and-disability-in-commonwealth-laws-dp-81/10-review-of-state-and-territory-legislation/informed-consent-to-medical-treatment Amended by the Abbott government, it used to be quite simply that the government could not make a person have any medical procedure without their (the persons) consent. On 16/10/2020 at 9:31 AM, cadete said: Its very Simple mate... All the Constitution does as @malloy alluded to is designate what powers the Federal Government has, that is pretty much it. It does contain any of these crazy privileges that you believe it contains for your benefit. Also I love how as all your news sources are usually some dude in a Gym on Facebook that you think a link to 3AW is like throwing down an Opinion Piece written by a Nobel Prize winner in the London fucken Times. I don't know what the fuck you are on about? You talk nonsese and don't even support City? On 16/10/2020 at 9:21 PM, jw1739 said: Absolutely you're not a dickhead. I'm sure that there are many people who don't know that Victoria has a constitution, let alone what's in it, and if they remember Gough Whitlam and Sir John Kerr they have heard of the Commonwealth Constitution but still probably don't know much beyond that. State constitution cannot contradict the federal constitution. I bet most people don't know what our constitutions are, I think most 'young' people think it's a replica of the American. mostly because I like the song, second unless you are a dumbass is stupidly obvious. OmniBus Edited October 20, 2020 by moops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 20, 2020 Report Share Posted October 20, 2020 On 16/10/2020 at 7:13 PM, Shahanga said: You’re not a dickhead. Just an average bloke wondering what’s the fucks going on. Actually 50 years ago you’d be an ALP voter, but now they hate you. God knows why. 15 years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 20, 2020 Report Share Posted October 20, 2020 (edited) On 16/10/2020 at 9:31 AM, cadete said: Its very Simple mate... All the Constitution does as @malloy alluded to is designate what powers the Federal Government has, that is pretty much it. It does contain any of these crazy privileges that you believe it contains for your benefit. Also I love how as all your news sources are usually some dude in a Gym on Facebook that you think a link to 3AW is like throwing down an Opinion Piece written by a Nobel Prize winner in the London fucken Times. redacted. I can't remember anything. Edited October 20, 2020 by moops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted October 20, 2020 Author Report Share Posted October 20, 2020 (edited) 14 hours ago, moops said: https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/equality-capacity-and-disability-in-commonwealth-laws-dp-81/10-review-of-state-and-territory-legislation/informed-consent-to-medical-treatment Amended by the Abbott government, it used to be quite simply that the government could not make a person have any medical procedure without their (the persons) consent. I don't know what the fuck you are on about? You talk nonsese and don't even support City? State constitution cannot contradict the federal constitution. I bet most people don't know what our constitutions are, I think most 'young' people think it's a replica of the American. mostly because I like the song, second unless you are a dumbass is stupidly obvious. OmniBus Who gives a shit that I dont follow A-League, still done a lot more for your club than you ever did as you stood behind a banner I designed, held up a Tifo I had the idea for and painted. Or when you brought stickers with the Logo I suggested. A lot people on this forum know who I am than whoever the fuck you are... Also only idiots who learn their Politics via a crap 90's Marxist Rapcore would think Countries have the same Constitution, only Liberia has/had the same exact Constitution as the States. Tony Abbott put in place a Statue in regards to Common Law, he did not amend the Constitution as sadly in this Country the Public have to support an Amendment to the Constitution via a Referendum which is why we did not become a Republic because people with knowledge as bad as yours thought we should be able to Vote for the President. (As they have no knowledge of how our Constitution works). Keep trying... Your not going to get there... But maybe you can post Limp Bizcuit next time! Edited October 20, 2020 by cadete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted October 22, 2020 Report Share Posted October 22, 2020 (edited) On 21/10/2020 at 10:52 AM, cadete said: Who gives a shit that I dont follow A-League, still done a lot more for your club than you ever did as you stood behind a banner I designed, held up a Tifo I had the idea for and painted. Or when you brought stickers with the Logo I suggested. A lot people on this forum know who I am than whoever the fuck you are... Also only idiots who learn their Politics via a crap 90's Marxist Rapcore would think Countries have the same Constitution, only Liberia has/had the same exact Constitution as the States. Tony Abbott put in place a Statue in regards to Common Law, he did not amend the Constitution as sadly in this Country the Public have to support an Amendment to the Constitution via a Referendum which is why we did not become a Republic because people with knowledge as bad as yours thought we should be able to Vote for the President. (As they have no knowledge of how our Constitution works). Keep trying... Your not going to get there... But maybe you can post Limp Bizcuit next time! Whatever, should we bow to you? reguardless you should support Aussie football, we need all the support it can get. the same whatever, conjecture. whatever, you are a blast, try to stay on point, yes he did amend the constitution, google it ffs .The funniest part is that you are arguing against a liberal, or for a Liberal, how does it work? Just because I love you so much. Peta Credlin exposed the fucks. They are all in it together. Edited October 22, 2020 by moops 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bannon Posted October 22, 2020 Report Share Posted October 22, 2020 George pell is still a cunt. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted October 23, 2020 Report Share Posted October 23, 2020 9 hours ago, Bannon said: George pell is still a cunt. Maybe. But I don't think that was on the charge sheet. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt50 Posted October 24, 2020 Report Share Posted October 24, 2020 On 23/10/2020 at 11:03 AM, jw1739 said: Maybe. But I don't think that was on the charge sheet. Correct. It was definitely a penis. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted November 6, 2020 Report Share Posted November 6, 2020 On 13/10/2020 at 9:56 PM, moops said: if you are really fussed about my past post I will grudgingly dedicate my weekend to satiate your thirst if it makes you feel better. Understand that there are 3 guys taking the Victorian government (Labor (can't even spell)) to court, there must be a precident. I listen, I am not right wing or left wing, I judge by Merritt and what is good for me. I have voted liberal, labour, greens and Democrat. Second paragraph was nonsense. Third paragraph made no sense to me, sorry. I might look into the book. Seriously I think most of my posts have been government links, I think for myself after seeing data. You are free to debate the findings, you are free to have an opinion, you are not free to have your own facts. Ask yourself this, I am in the construction business, why don't I support Dictator Dan? Well the High Court has dismissed all challenges to lockdowns and border closures. In one of the judgements the HC explicitly stated that there is no constitutional right to freedom of movement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted November 28, 2020 Report Share Posted November 28, 2020 The latest problem for Morrison is the "war crimes" report involving elements of the SAS. Whilst the command structure within the ADF is accountable for what happened we need to remember that our armed forces go where they're told to go - they don't go there of their own volition. Successive governments have chosen to involve our soldiers in hell-holes such as Afghanistan, and have to be accountable for that. IMO we should never have been there in the first place. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted November 29, 2020 Report Share Posted November 29, 2020 9 hours ago, jw1739 said: The latest problem for Morrison is the "war crimes" report involving elements of the SAS. Whilst the command structure within the ADF is accountable for what happened we need to remember that our armed forces go where they're told to go - they don't go there of their own volition. Successive governments have chosen to involve our soldiers in hell-holes such as Afghanistan, and have to be accountable for that. IMO we should never have been there in the first place. Especially when you run a “tag and release programme”. When the enemy you captured 2 weeks ago is back shooting at you today, who wouldn’t think of an alternative solution. Having said that, it’s not really about Morrison. You’ve got Howard first then carried on by Rudd Gillard Rudd Abbott Turnbull. I actually think all Morrison has done for this one is inherit the mess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted November 29, 2020 Report Share Posted November 29, 2020 9 hours ago, jw1739 said: The latest problem for Morrison is the "war crimes" report involving elements of the SAS. Whilst the command structure within the ADF is accountable for what happened we need to remember that our armed forces go where they're told to go - they don't go there of their own volition. Successive governments have chosen to involve our soldiers in hell-holes such as Afghanistan, and have to be accountable for that. IMO we should never have been there in the first place. This does not absolve the troops, even if the war had been justified (and in my view it wasn't) then a professional army has all troops following standing orders. The front line commanders disobeyed orders. They need to be court martialled. Why didn't high command know what was going on when they should have known? They need to be stripped of rank but I fear that we would be left without a high command if that was to occur. However some press reports suggest that the SAS troops were overused in roles that they were not suited for and this then comes to high command for which they need to be answerable. If politicians got involved in those decisions then the politicians need to be held accountable in a court of law (although I don't think that is possible). Unfortunately politicians are held accountable through the elections and this is not likely to be at the forefront of the electorate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted November 29, 2020 Report Share Posted November 29, 2020 1 hour ago, Shahanga said: Especially when you run a “tag and release programme”. When the enemy you captured 2 weeks ago is back shooting at you today, who wouldn’t think of an alternative solution. Having said that, it’s not really about Morrison. You’ve got Howard first then carried on by Rudd Gillard Rudd Abbott Turnbull. I actually think all Morrison has done for this one is inherit the mess. 1 hour ago, NewConvert said: This does not absolve the troops, even if the war had been justified (and in my view it wasn't) then a professional army has all troops following standing orders. The front line commanders disobeyed orders. They need to be court martialled. Why didn't high command know what was going on when they should have known? They need to be stripped of rank but I fear that we would be left without a high command if that was to occur. However some press reports suggest that the SAS troops were overused in roles that they were not suited for and this then comes to high command for which they need to be answerable. If politicians got involved in those decisions then the politicians need to be held accountable in a court of law (although I don't think that is possible). Unfortunately politicians are held accountable through the elections and this is not likely to be at the forefront of the electorate. I agree with both of you. Worth a read here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angus_Campbell_(general) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 FMD "Scotty from Marketing" is having a bad trot. He just cannot get anything right at the moment. The Brittany Higgins episode does my head in. What sort of show are we running in Canberra when Parliament House security lets two pissed staffers into a Minister's office in the middle of the night, later one leaves the building and the other is allowed to remain in said office to "sleep it off" until the morning? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerine Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 (edited) Sorry @jw1739 but I completely disagree. They are Parliament House security, not the MP/Senator/political staffs’ babysitters. They have no role in policing who goes in and out of offices and in what state. If the staff have the correct credentials and all hours access is allowed, then it is absolutely not the security’s role to stop them - it would create a huge number of grey areas. For example how drunk would Barnaby Joyce have to be before he was banned from getting into his office? How married would he have to be before he is prohibited from sneaking around with his press secretary. Plenty of MPs/Senators/lobbyists/staff work late at night, drink in that building, party and do everything else in that building. If you think that should change it is up to the parliament (and their HR staff) to set the rules. Not a hired security firm. Additional edit: But yes, I do agree that all of the issues coming to light strongly suggest that Parliament House culture needs to seriously change. Edited March 23, 2021 by Tangerine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haz Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 Imagine having a wank at work Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 4 hours ago, jw1739 said: FMD "Scotty from Marketing" is having a bad trot. He just cannot get anything right at the moment. The Brittany Higgins episode does my head in. What sort of show are we running in Canberra when Parliament House security lets two pissed staffers into a Minister's office in the middle of the night, later one leaves the building and the other is allowed to remain in said office to "sleep it off" until the morning? Very much agree. 4 minutes ago, Tangerine said: Sorry @jw1739 but I completely disagree. They are Parliament House security, not the MP/Senator/political staffs’ babysitters. They have no role in policing who goes in and out of offices and in what state. If the staff have the correct credentials and all hours access is allowed, then it is absolutely not the security’s role to stop them - it would create a huge number of grey areas. For example how drunk would Barnaby Joyce have to be before he was banned from getting into his office? How married would he have to be before he is prohibited from sneaking around with his press secretary. Plenty of MPs/Senators/lobbyists/staff work late at night, drink in that building, party and do everything else in that building. If you think that should change it is up to the parliament (and their HR staff) to set the rules. Not a hired security firm. Two things: first 'duty of care' is very much in the cards whether government or private security firm; secondly national security although here it gets murkier. Duty of care is contingent on all working staff by law - the security guard should have checked at the very least. National security is dicier because the security staff are not there to ensure/enforce national security but a report about the state of sobriety of the staff should have been raised. To me there are three disturbing things: that this is the only workplace that permits staff to enter the premises pissed - I know of no other employer that allows this and in my previous employer it would have been instant dismissal whereas my current employer would send me to a gulag; more worrisome, and I hope that I am wrong, inside Parliament House the police (AFP) cannot enter without an invitation which could possibly mean that a capital crime could be committed (or be about to be committed) and teh AFP cannot enter without a valid invitation, and the implications for this are substantial; third who has sex with a desk? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 38 minutes ago, haz said: Imagine having a wank at work A Met train driver did, between Southern Cross and Flinders Street. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haz Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 9 hours ago, jw1739 said: A Met train driver did, between Southern Cross and Flinders Street. He must have been quick 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 2 hours ago, haz said: He must have been quick This case received quite some publicity. He stopped the train while he did it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt50 Posted March 23, 2021 Report Share Posted March 23, 2021 9 minutes ago, jw1739 said: This case received quite some publicity. He stopped the train while he did it. Must have really jacked off fellow commuters.😡 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted March 24, 2021 Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 14 hours ago, Tangerine said: Sorry @jw1739 but I completely disagree. They are Parliament House security, not the MP/Senator/political staffs’ babysitters. They have no role in policing who goes in and out of offices and in what state. If the staff have the correct credentials and all hours access is allowed, then it is absolutely not the security’s role to stop them - it would create a huge number of grey areas. For example how drunk would Barnaby Joyce have to be before he was banned from getting into his office? How married would he have to be before he is prohibited from sneaking around with his press secretary. Plenty of MPs/Senators/lobbyists/staff work late at night, drink in that building, party and do everything else in that building. If you think that should change it is up to the parliament (and their HR staff) to set the rules. Not a hired security firm. Additional edit: But yes, I do agree that all of the issues coming to light strongly suggest that Parliament House culture needs to seriously change. I am quite frankly astonished that you do not consider the incident to be a security breach. Two people without their parliamentary identity tags rock up at 1.50 a.m. and are allowed into a Minister's office simply on the basis that they gave names that matched those on a list? They could have been lookalikes simulating drunkenness, and been equipped with the necessary to hack into the computer system and download or upload as they wished - including uploading malware. Everyone knows that government software has more holes than Swiss cheese. IMO this was a major security breach. FMD we're talking about the Parliament of Australia here, not the local bowls club. What sexual acts did or did not happen in the office are an entirely separate matter as far as I am concerned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerine Posted March 24, 2021 Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 @jw1739 then the rule should be: 'no entry without parliamentary identity tags' OR it should be, 'no entry unless you are below 0.05 on the breathalyzer' OR it should be, 'no entry after 8pm'. AND probably it should be all of the above. Clearly all of these things are currently allowed. The security company do not write the rules, they are hired to enforce rules already in place by their employer - the Parliament of Australia. Otherwise, what you appear to be asking is that the security firm become the adjudicators of what is appropriate workplace entry, behavior, working hours, attire and business. My point is simple: make clear rules and the contracted security will enforce them. Do not ask people on <$100k/annum to be the judge and jury on how, when and why 'important' people on $100k + / $200+ / $300k + can enter their place of work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted March 24, 2021 Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 41 minutes ago, Tangerine said: @jw1739 then the rule should be: 'no entry without parliamentary identity tags' OR it should be, 'no entry unless you are below 0.05 on the breathalyzer' OR it should be, 'no entry after 8pm'. AND probably it should be all of the above. Clearly all of these things are currently allowed. The security company do not write the rules, they are hired to enforce rules already in place by their employer - the Parliament of Australia. Otherwise, what you appear to be asking is that the security firm become the adjudicators of what is appropriate workplace entry, behavior, working hours, attire and business. My point is simple: make clear rules and the contracted security will enforce them. Do not ask people on <$100k/annum to be the judge and jury on how, when and why 'important' people on $100k + / $200+ / $300k + can enter their place of work. Fair comments. Unless you do actually know the terms of reference of the "security" staff at Parliament House and the rules about entry - at any time, not just after hours - then I think we're saying the same thing. What happened does not pass the "pub test." On the question of remuneration, I think that's irrelevant. As is rank. As is who you appear to be. Evidenced by The Chaser boys and how easily they fooled the security at CHOGM in Sydney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangerine Posted March 24, 2021 Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 @jw1739 i have no idea the terms of reference of the security staff. But i think it's a very fair assumption that if they had failed to enforce rules set out for them, leading to an alleged assault within Parliament House, then they would be facing serious repercussions. I haven't heard any talk of them being professionally at fault, only that it fails the "pub test". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted March 24, 2021 Report Share Posted March 24, 2021 38 minutes ago, Tangerine said: @jw1739 i have no idea the terms of reference of the security staff. But i think it's a very fair assumption that if they had failed to enforce rules set out for them, leading to an alleged assault within Parliament House, then they would be facing serious repercussions. I haven't heard any talk of them being professionally at fault, only that it fails the "pub test". Well 24 hours is a long time. It appears that the alleged rapist was sacked for security breach by the defense force (not as many believe as a way to get out of the rape allegations). It seems that said bloke was rather careless with sensitive security documentation. And yes I do agree that if the rules are that lax then they need to be tightened. What I am astonished about is the fact that they are that lax considering that so many companies in the private sector have much demanding protocols and policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted August 21, 2021 Report Share Posted August 21, 2021 Anyone else had enough of this authoritarian bullshit? Rubber fucking bullets were the last straw for me. I’m joining a Libertarian political party (never thought I’d join a party, guess you never know) and am going to stand up for our way of life (that we once had) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted August 21, 2021 Report Share Posted August 21, 2021 2 hours ago, Shahanga said: Anyone else had enough of this authoritarian bullshit? Rubber fucking bullets were the last straw for me. I’m joining a Libertarian political party (never thought I’d join a party, guess you never know) and am going to stand up for our way of life (that we once had) Libertarianism is the opposite side of communism. Which is why neither ism has ever established a successful society. Take that back - highland PNG were as close as a libertarian society as you can get but cannibalism was never a thing elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted August 21, 2021 Report Share Posted August 21, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, Shahanga said: Anyone else had enough of this authoritarian bullshit? Rubber fucking bullets were the last straw for me. I’m joining a Libertarian political party (never thought I’d join a party, guess you never know) and am going to stand up for our way of life (that we once had) I suppose a lot depends on which particular way of life you're referring to. For example, a bloke like me can't understand why anyone would be anti-vaccination when you look at how many lives have been saved and disabilities avoided by various vaccines. I sat next to a lad in Primary School, indeed every day I'd meet him at his place and we'd ride the last mile together on our bikes (another way of life, before Mum's taxi). One day he was unwell and couldn't join me. The next he was ill in hospital. It was polio. He ended up with a crook leg in a leg-iron. When you've been that close (I didn't get it BTW - some miracle or other) you believe in vaccines. Edited August 21, 2021 by jw1739 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.