Do you honestly think this is more likely under a Liberal government?
Who, are you suggesting? I can’t think of any party represented in any Australian parliament that could be characterised as libertarian.
It can’t be more likely than under the person who set it in motion. It at least raises the possibility that they’ll kill it to be contrary, or because they don’t have to worry about saving face.
I wasn’t suggesting anyone in particular.
No fuck no, we don’t need libertarians.
We need less Stephen Conroy. Rudd can stay. Conroy can Just. Go.
I know someone who is a paid Canberra lobbyist and who is working for business interests against the filter. This person’s view is that the government isn’t worried that it will lose votes en masse: the filter isn’t an important issue of principal to most people and it won’t affect people’s experience of the internet on a day to day basis (or at least not in such a way as to cause them to change their vote). The filter is being driven by Rudd himself as a personal issue because he is a wowser.
My lobbyist contact thinks that the Libs would kill it because they have less of a reason not to, as **Grumman **outlines, and because it is very unpopular with big business, telco’s in particular, and they carry a lot of weight with the Libs.
Gleena, again my lobbyist contact says that the inside word is that Conroy is privately against the filter but he is also ambitious and willing to put his private views aside in order to please “Top” ie Rudd.
Anyone who wants to stick it to Telstra is OK by me. I simply don’t believe the filter will get up, except maybe in some reduced form.
And I certainly don’t think it is or should be a government-changing issue. Bad as Labor have been on dropping the climate-change ball, Abbott’s statement that CC - not specifically human-caused CC, but all CC - is “crap” is much, much worse.
The Telstra split will happen regardless - Howard fucked that up initially, but it will happen eventually. I don’t think it’s a government changing issue either. I’m not so sure I believe that Conroy doesn’t agree - he’s taking far too much personal heat on the issue and if he’s ambitious as stated, he’d have backed down by now as it’s hurting his career personally.
I think that the Greens either have to come round that half a glass is better than none on CC, or Rudd has to move to the Green side, one or the other.
Interesting times - and I will get to vote in the next election, whee!
Advancing one’s career in the Labor party is in very large part a matter of pleasing internal powerbrokers. Pleasing the public is a minor consideration when it comes to being a appointed a senior minister etc.
The “greatest gift” thing really irks me. The greatest gift you can give a partner is love, trust, respect … that and a velicoraptor-monkey.
Conroy’s problem is that as one of the factional Daleks of the Victorian Right, he has no leverage over Rudd who is not beholden to any faction. This breaks Rule #1 of the ALP Standard Operating Procedures
Having ascended to the factional leadership, (in the time-honoured factional MO of poison and hatchet) Conroy then shafted all his potential competitors, while simultaneously accumulating his own apostles in the name of “bringing in new blood” in 2006. You really had to admire it’s execution.
Like Gleena I believe this policy is sits comfortably with his views and meglomania and so when he finds one of his pet projects in sync with “Top” he flogs the horse for all it’s worth.
That he would “privately” be against it is simply hedging his bets and trying to show “Top” he’s a team player. Which he’s not, and I’m pretty sure “Top” knows that too.