circumlocutory square
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Only the Labor state governments, of course, mind you. The Liberal Premier of South Australia is peeerfectly alright. The Liberals are Economically Responsible, so the thing they're doing is responsible.
Meanwhile, Gladys Berejiklian of New South Wales enjoys high approval despite (a) the Ruby Princess debacle, where the Coalition deflected by saying "oh of course we'll comply with an inquiry" and then simply not complying with its requests for testimony/evidence, and (b) that scandal where her secret boyfriend (and fellow MP) was essentially selling visas, which Nine-Fairfax played off as "aww the poor vulnerable Premier got deceived by a nasty scumbag guy, let's all forgive her and keep out of her private life (feminism!!!)".
My first launched Trope!
In the name of being honest
He told a virtual meeting of the Pacific Islands Forum leaders on Friday that he was "very confident" Australia wouldn't need to use the credits to reach Australia's Paris agreement emissions reductions target.
But he did not renounce their use, as advocates of stronger climate action had hoped.
"The credits that have been gained by over-achieving on our targets were hard-earned. They are a product of Australia's action," Mr Morrison said.
"Today I can announce that Australia is very confident that we will now achieve our 2030 target without the need to draw on our carry-over credits."
Mr Morrison has flagged changes to its carry-over credit policy earlier. Australia has promised to cut its 2005 emission levels by 26 to 28 per cent before 2030 as part of the Paris Agreement.
According to current projections, Australia will only be able to meet those targets by claiming carry-over credits: a controversial method of emissions accounting that uses credits gained under the Kyoto Protocol toward the Paris Agreement.
Australia's use of the credits has been widely condemned, particularly by Pacific Island leaders.
Last year they signed the Nadi Bay Declaration, which called on countries to "refrain from using carry-over credits" to meet their climate change commitments.
Pacific leaders press for aggressive action despite COVID-19 pandemic
At the opening of the Pacific Island climate forum — timed to mark five years since the Paris Agreement — Pacific island leaders pressed wealthy nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions despite the challenges posed by the pandemic.
Fiji's Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama said COVID-19 "must not delay" high-polluting countries from achieving a net-zero emissions economy.
"We must seize the opportunity this fateful moment gives us — to build a global economic recovery that stimulates climate-smart and inclusive sustainable development," Mr Bainimarama said.
"We must not stand idly by and watch the world's most vulnerable countries suffer."
Vanuatu's Prime Minister Bob Loughman outlined the unique predicament Pacific islands face in trying to cope with the devastating effects of both climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic.
He pointed to his country's experience during the category five Cyclone Harold, that struck Vanuatu while its borders were closed because of the pandemic.
"Cyclone Harold was a stark reminder that, notwithstanding the current impacts of COVID-19, climate change remains the biggest threat facing humanity today," Mr Loughman said.
Meanwhile, New Zealand's Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said that next year, her Government would announce their first "emissions reduction plan" to make a "meaningful impact" on climate change within the next 10 years.
circumlocutory square
Hmph, more 'meet & beat' sloganeering.
Meanwhile, the UN will block Australia from having a speaking slot at its upcoming climate change summit
. This is like... a student writing two sentences in place of what they're told needs to be a full-paragraph answer, then attempting to appeal their resulting low marks by simply insisting that they've done the homework properly.
(... really, given its scope, that story ought to be on the ABC news site as well. I searched 'UN Climate Summit' by recency on the latter and didn't find anything. Thanks, Ita Buttrose.)
My first launched Trope!
circumlocutory square
(Sorry for double-post; found some new news I thought worthy of discussion.)
... I didn't find this out until today, but some in the Coalition want to change federal election laws so that compulsory preferential voting is replaced by optional preferential voting. In practice, this would mean that voters are only required to mark their #1 preference on ballots, and don't have to indicate runoff preferences.
Since "I don't legally have put this effort in anymore, so I won't" is a timeless human behavioural phenomenon, one thing this means is that minor-party votes are far more likely to be wasted (e.g., we'll have Greens voters not bothering to preference Labor over the Coalition, thereby costing the Left precious marginal seats). It also makes weaponised disaffection/bothsiderism (which a lot of major papers push because it helps the Liberals) more a effective tool. And of course this could also be a stepping-stone to even more electoral finagling by the right.
... I recall once again Adam Bandt saying he was happy to take votes off of Labor "even if the consequence [was] more Coalition governments" when he became federal Greens leader. Part and parcel, Bandt, you bothsidesing nitwit. Part and bloody parcel.
Edited by coruscatingInquisitor on Dec 17th 2020 at 3:40:37 AM
My first launched Trope!
It can be a successful strategy. Labor did that in Queenland back in the 90s and the Coalition (now the LNP) really still haven't recovered.
In the name of being honest
AFAIK, they kind of tanked it at first. It took One Nation emerging into the political scene like a racist chestburster and some more time spent strategising until they managed to leverage right-wing voter apathy into victory in 2001.
And I don't really pay as much attention to the Greens as a whole as I probably should, but... bby n o
Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)
circumlocutory square
As in, making preferences optional? Hmm. On the one hand, I'm not in favour of that regardless of which party it helps, 'cos mandatory preferencing does a better job of forcing people to not throw their votes away (the less our electoral system resembles the Pommy one, the better). On the other, when QLD Labor won in 1987 the playing field the playing field had been rigged for ages in favour of the other side (Murdoch-dominated media, the Bjelkemander, etc.). But then again (again), I'm a lot more accustomed to the leftward vote being split than the rightward vote.
I'm curious — what exactly is the deal with the whole 'LNP' thing? Were they forced to rebrand due to wrecked reputation? An attempt at closer incorporation of the two parties due to infighting? I've read a little bit about Queensland's politics; the gist I've gotten so far is "Coalition in power for ages, grew bloated with complacency until it exploded like Mr. Creosote".
I rather despise leftists who see it as their mission to "punish" the big-tent centre-left parties who can actually form governments by increasing their chances of losing. It's kind of... accelerationist, knowingly or not. I don't accept a political philosophy that punishes the vulnerable for being deceived in the hope that they'll one day admit you were right and come grovelling.
The whole Coalition -> LNP thing does have it's roots in the Bjelke-Peterson era but to vastly simplify in Queensland the National Party has almost always been the stronger of the two Coaltion parties (as opposed to most other states and the Federal Level where the Liberals are generally the stronger) and there was a whole bunch of internal politics related to that, including the Liberals at one point being reduced to a single seat (Moggil, held by Dr Bruce Flegg) and them automatically getting the Deputy Premier/Deputy Opposition Leader position as well as several others which several senior National Party members thought gave the Liberals more influence and power than their numbers warranted. And at the same time the Liberals (when there was more than one) felt that they were being frozen out of the actual decision making process by sheer weight of numbers which was in turn limiting their ability to actually gain seats because the Nationals focus was on the rural consituencies that formed their power base rather than the urban and suburban seats the Liberals were trying to gain.
The end result was that both parties state level organisations utterly imploded and the LNP was what emerged from the rubble. Which then decided to epically screw things up by making their first leater Lawrence Springborg, a main who's main claim to fame was torpedoeing one election already as Opposition Leader pre-merger by managing to put the entire state to sleep through his campaigning. It hasn't really gotten any better since.
Edited by KnightofLsama on Dec 18th 2020 at 8:21:42 PM
What'd they do now?
circumlocutory square
Thanks for the explanation!
I believe eagle was reacting to the last part of the post I'd made before that. In short: at the start of his leadership, Adam Bandt implied that he's okay with more years of Coalition rule if it means punishing Labor for being 'not left enough'.
Which is just the kind of privileged accelerationist thinking you find from a well-to-do inner-city Arts/Law grad who thinks that Trotsky was a way cool dude, thinks the political messaging battle over coal-centric communities can be won with 'press a button, find jobs for a few people', and isn't economically literate enough to even use the word "neoliberal" properly.
Edited by coruscatingInquisitor on Dec 19th 2020 at 11:21:34 PM
My first launched Trope!
In the name of being honest
Welp, looks like the other shoe finally dropped. Perth's northeast is on fire, with 71 houses destroyed so far. My family (well, just my mum and aunt at the moment) lives a fair bit further south, but you can see the blaze lighting up the horizon from anywhere in the city... at least if you're not cooped up inside because of the lockdown and all.
I've been on the phone with some of my friends from Swan who got the evac order and am feeling all kinds of awful for being stuck away from home and unable to do much, I guess.
Edited by eagleoftheninth on Feb 3rd 2021 at 5:12:58 AM
Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)
Professional Forum Ninja
Fixed the link.
Edited by tclittle on Feb 17th 2021 at 3:03:48 AM
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Um, since when is Texas part of Australia?
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
Professional Forum Ninja
I can still share international news as long as I saw it. Better to keep people informed.
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Yeah but your link has nothing to do with what you're talking about with Facebook so that's confusing
Like reflections in the glass!
Plus I presume this is limited to Facebook for now and not say the result of Australia coping the Great Firewall of China here.
That said I have to agree that sharing news about Texas just to prove you can still share international news in lieu of the actually releavant article is not exactly the wisest choice.
I think this was the one they intended to post.
Edited by MorningStar1337 on Feb 17th 2021 at 1:01:07 AM
Professional Forum Ninja
WHY?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!!?!?
Sorry about that, I do that on occasion.
"We're all paper, we're all scissors, we're all fightin' with our mirrors, scared we'll never find somebody to love."
Like reflections in the glass!
Its alright. I got a good joke on the General Politics thread out of it
In the name of being honest
Aaand the pages for every Australian news outlet just disappeared from Facebook.
Yes, even Betoota.
Very cool, Google, thank you
Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)
Like reflections in the glass!
Though it reflects poorly on Google in ways not germane to Australia. (Unless Rupert Moloch happens to have a stake in Australian media?)
Edited by MorningStar1337 on Feb 17th 2021 at 2:28:17 AM
It would surprise me if he doesn't in some manner, given he is from Australia.
Does that mean Australia will be getting all of it's internet news from Newscorp?
Never trust anyone who uses "degenerate" as an insult.
Okay I don't know if I'm being whooshed but News Corp owns The Australian and through that controls the entire media discourse in Australia, and this law itself is something Murdoch was pushing for.
That's what I'm unclear it, it's only mentioned that Google has made a deal with News Corp so maybe? But that would be a horrendously bad outcome, so most probably.
Edited by Saiga on Feb 17th 2021 at 11:27:35 PM
In the name of being honest
Murdoch is Australian media.
And looks like a whole bunch of state/government agencies are getting their Facebook pages wiped out alongside, for some reason. Including health bodies. In the middle of a pandemic. Welp.
Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)
All the while painting the state governments that actually took the hard choices and did most of the heavy lifting as the second coming of the Khmer Rouge.
Echoing hymn of my fellow passerine | Art blog (under construction)