Australian National
(anotd)
Sunday 19th July 1998
This on-line paper is now archived for perpetuity in the
National Library
of Australia
Subscriber's password
check (have your subscription number handy)
Subscribers get free access to the monthly "The
Strategy" on-line from April 1998.
Recent stories exclusive to
(how to)
subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day now at the
bottom of this page.
"ON NOW" weekly abbreviated anotd
fax-back
-
Dial: 1902 211037 and follow the instructions.
(Note: costs 0.75 c per minute will be billed to your phone account
under "ON NOW NEWS LETTER")
Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line
DISCUSSION forum] [One
Nation Federal Web Site]
Archive of weekly features (available to all
readers):
[The
Canberra Column]
[Economic
Rationalism]
Today's
Headlines
an Aussie's viewpoint on Australia's
first daily Internet newspaper.
Since
October 1995
Between the One Nation lines
The Ipswich City Council were
split on Friday about allowing Pauline Hanson to use the council's facilities.
Apparently Mayor John Nugent (seen right) did a "ring around" to find
out what councilors thought about allowing the party to use the Ipswich Civic
Hall in early August.
After the ring-around he met with One Nation Queensland state director, Peter
James on Friday. Following the meeting Nugent said, "As a council we must
ensure that staff and public safety is our top priority and, in this instance,
we feel we have made the right decision in that regard (ie banning Pauline Hanson
from using the venue)."
Yesterday I
demonstrated how this change of heart follows months of council
facilities being used by the One Nation party without any problems being
experienced.
An angry Peter James told me, "This is a highly politicised decision which
One Nation will challenge in the courts."
Three Ipswich councilors agree with James, they
are:
The councilors who apparently supported the decision
to ban Mrs Hanson from using Council facilities are:
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Francisca Bloom
Division 1 |
Paul Tully
Division 2 |
Joannie Woods
Division 3 |
Christine Claridge
Division 5 |
Gerard Pender
Division 7 |
Rick Gluyas
Division 8 |
Denise Hanley
Division 9 |
Charlie Pisasale
Division 11 |
(Note:
Division 4 is vacant at the moment. Paul Tully - Division 2 - is often seen
at One Nation protests. Pic Right: Tully at
the Gold Coast launch of One Nation in 1997)
Yesterday One Nation's state director Peter James sent this letter to
Mayor John Nugent:
18th July 1998
Mayor of Ipswich
Councilor John Nugent
Refusal to allow Pauline Hanson MP to hire Ipswich
Civic Centre venue - 4th August 1998
You are hereby advised that the matter of the Ipswich
City Council's refusal to allow Pauline Hanson MP to hire a venue in the
Ipswich Civic Centre on 4 August 1998 will be referred to the Anti Discrimination
Tribunal and that all associated documents tapes and instruments associated
with that decision will be sought through Freedom of Information provisions
in support of a charge that the decision to not allow Pauline Hanson to hire
a Council venue for the purpose of conducting a public meeting with her
constituents was discriminatory.
You are further advised that this matter, and in particular
the involvement of Councilors who had undeclared vested interests being party
to a decision concerning Pauline Hanson's use of a council venue will be
referred to the Minister for Local Government and the Queensland
Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely
Peter James
For Pauline Hanson
Peter James also sent the following letter to all Councilors by fax on
Saturday morning (yesterday):
Pauline Hanson MP objects in the strongest possible
terms to the Ipswich City Council's refusal to allow her to hire a venue
in the Ipswich Civic Centre on 4 August 1998.
The venue was to have been used by Pauline Hanson,
as a Federal Member of Parliament to speak to her constituents and residents
in the Ipswich district. It was not a political party meeting and was not
promoted as such. No political party was mentioned in the application for
the booking (copy enclosed) and flyers (copy enclosed) promoting the meeting
clearly state the purpose of the meeting.
Constituents to whom these flyers were addressed were
ratepayers of Ipswich City Council, as is Pauline Hanson. Mayor Nugent is
on record as stating, "The council's decision is in no way discriminatory
against Ms Hanson". The Mayor's statement is refuted absolutely - it is perceived
as blatant discrimination and will be pursued as such. Council has effectively
denied a federal member of Parliament the right to communicate with her
constituents in the only venue considered large enough in this area to
accommodate the numbers likely to attend her public meeting.
On 16th July 1998, Peter James, representing Pauline
Hanson was contacted by a Council officer, Ms Pamela Blowers who was charged
with preparing a security assessment for the application. Peter James gave
advice by phone and then followed up by a personal meeting with Ms Blowers
and the Civic Centre manager. The following is a synopsis of Peter James'
statement to Ms Blowers:
-
Pauline Hanson has spoken to crowds of up to 400 at
numerous community halls in the Ipswich and surrounding districts over the
last twelve weeks without incident (ie no protesters or dissenters were
evident).
-
Pauline Hanson accepts her duty of care to take appropriate
measures to protect Council property hired in her name. Security arrangements
envisaged including briefing and requesting the presence of state police
as appropriate and employing private security as required.
Councilor Nugent has publicly referred to damage done
to the Civic Hall in early 1997 as being a consideration in the Council's
decision to reject Pauline Hanson's use of the venue. Public records clearly
indicate the presence of Councilor Paul Tully in the crowd which include
agitators who were responsible for the damage to Council property at that
time. On 17th July 1998 Councilor Tully may have been party to a judgement
against Pauline Hanson's use of council property on the grounds that the
safety of staff and the public was at risk. The Mayor is reported to have
conducted a 'ring around' of Councilors on 17th July 1998 to consider the
matter and taped the conversations with the Councilors. Those tapes and any
other documentation associated with this decision may be sought through Freedom
of Information provisions.
Pauline Hanson requests the Ipswich City Council review
the decision in a public Council meeting at which time the Councilors should
be given an unbiased security assessment and those Councilors with vested
interests should abstain from voting.
Yours sincerely
Peter James
For Pauline Hanson
We received email from many readers all over the world who expressed shock
at the Ipswich City Council's decision. A selection of these letters is carried
under "You Say".
Wesley Collge imposes ban on Hanson speakers
Melbourne's exclusive Wesley College has barred One Nation from speaking
to its students, in a decision that the principal, Mr David Loader, yesterday
defended strongly - despite acknowledging himself guilty of gagging a legitimate
debate.
``It's the dilemma of democracy,'' he said. ``It's a hard call and I'm conscious
I'm on the line for it.''
He said Wesley girls and boys would love to debate One Nation at the campus,
and that schools should expose students to alternative views.
But he would not let the party use the school as a political platform. Its
stance on multiculturalism incensed him.
``So yes, it's true, I said I don't wish to have them on campus,'' he said.
``I feel guilty about saying no in the sense that I'm gagging what I see
as a legitimate debate. I still feel very strongly I do not want One Nation
here (at the school),'' he said.
``I feel passionate that Australia is a multicultural society and stronger
for that.''
The school's Public Question Society had organised speakers from the Liberals,
Labor and Greens parties, he said. However those groups did not contest
Australia's major cultural values in the same way as One Nation.
Mr Loader also said he would not invite the gun lobby to the school, but
pro-life or pro-choice abortion advocates would be allowed.
Earlier this year, the Public Question Society approached One Nation about
the possibility of sending a speaker to the school, Mr Loader said, but he
had blocked the move without hesitation - despite debate on the subject from
teachers and students.
Most school principals would have reached the same decision, he said. But
they would recognise the vulnerability of the stance because the party did
not uphold true democracy or freedom of speech.
He would not criticise the decision of Melbourne High School's principal,
Mr Ray Willis, to allow the party's spokeswoman on immigration, Mrs Robyn
Spencer, to speak there yesterday at the instigation of the school's
student-based Political Interest Group.
About 200 students heard Mrs Spencer speak, mainly on immigration and trade,
at the school without incident. Other students were turned away because the
venue quickly filled. Media were barred.
Mrs Spencer said she had not spoken to any schools before on behalf of One
Nation, although she had spoken as the co-founder of Australians Against
Further Immigration party. She believed the Wesley approach might have come
before she joined One Nation. She wished to speak to more schools, but had
not been approached.
``I would say, how do they expect young people to be informed by relying
on the media interpretation of what One Nation's about?''
In failing to give school students the chance to hear from One Nation, schools
were being bigoted and narrow-minded, she said.
A spokeswoman for the Department of Education said it was aware of the debate.
The department's position was that students could make up their own minds
on different political views.
Note: Wesley College is run by the
Uniting Church. The Uniting Church has been torn apart because of the acceptance
of gay and lesbianism within its upper bureaucracy.
Maybe these are the values that the College wants - if so I would not
send my children there.
Making the
news" -
an indepth exposé of media and political collusion at the highest
possible levels in Australia.
You say:
Subject: Ipswitch city council censorship of Pauline
Hanson
Dear Sir,
I must register my absolute outrage and disgust at
the politically motivated,fascist actions of the Ipswitch City Council in
banning One Nation from their usage of the city Hall . Surely ,this action
plumbs new depths in Australian politics. Are we to see escalation of this
behavior to include the banning of ANY political opponents?
The Labour dominated Ipswitch council has the right
to oppose any thing it likes,as do all of us,but to BAN a democraticlly elected
member of Parliament and her organisation sinks to the lowest level of jackbooted
persecution ever seen in this country.
It ranks right up there with the Suharto dictatorship,
the Burmese military repression of opposition and the tactics of any number
of Third World banana republic, two bob,medallion encrusted,petty tyrants.
Just what IS the Labor party's agenda here?
This sort of fascism is viewed with revulsion by the
civilised world and I would expect you,as a responsible member of a democratic
institution,to register your vehement rejection of the Ipswitch City Council's
actions .
Yours sincerely
Steve Nichols
Not Very Australian
The Ipswich City Council this week rejected an application
by Pauline Hanson's One Nation to use council facilities on the basis of
"concern for the safety of staff". Because a window was broken by a protester?,
and even after Pauline Hanson offered to provide security by an independent
security firm? It all seems a bit dodgy to me, and very unAustralian.
Removing Pauline Hansons right to the use of council
facilities is nothing less than discriminitory. I wonder if the decision
would be any different if the decision was in the hands of voters, instead
of the hands of Pauline Hansons opposition, who abuse that power at every
chance. It seems that before the state election the rules were different,
and now that the party is a threat to their sacred power they want to deny
them the right to use these facilities even though they know full well that
their would be no safety problems. These people should realise that they
are not only denying Pauline Hanson this right but they are denying the public
the right to be able to listen to free speech. Sounds like censorship.
Subject: Ipswich - The Totalitarian City
Dear Sir,
I am afraid to say that the latest antics by Ipswich
City Council in denying the use of "publicly owned" (not council owned)
facilities to a legally registered and democratic political party are nothing
more than another shabby attempt by the self proclaimed "ruling elite" to
incite hatred in our society.
This action smacks of the worlds most oppressive regimes.
What makes Nugent, Tully and Co think that they are being seen as any different
from any Stalin, Hitler, Amin, Pol Pot, Castro, etc.etc. They all began their
careers this way too. Couple that action with the Jewish attack via the Leibler
List and you have the makings of a pretty ugly scene. It would appear that
this is what they seek.
Probably what gets up the noses most of the "ruling
elite" is that One Nation people only react to their provocations in a legal
, decent and orderly fashion, so denying these despots the bad publicity
that they require to retain a grip on their own shaky positions.
The deeper they have their snouts in the trough, the
more vulnerable are their hind quarters.
Allan W. Doak
Logan Village
Subject: Re: Pauline Hanson
Dear Sir,
It has come to my attention that Ms. Pauline Hanson
has been banned from using council facilities in her electorate of
Blair.
Perhaps the labor-dominated Ipswich City Council has
had instructions from the Queensland Labor Party to - do anything that you
can to deny One Nation their right to a "fair go".
Apparently, the ban was imposed on the basis of "protecting
council staff from danger". The only danger I can see would come from the
"Rent-a-crowd" demonstrators probably hired by the major politically parties
to cause as much disruption as possible at all One Nation meetings.
Journalists, politicians and public servants still
don't get it. The more they abuse, criticize and ridicule One Nation the
more popular it becomes, because there is nothing the Aussie likes better
that sticking-up for and protecting the "under-dog".
Yours faithfully,
Beverley Collins
Subject: Ipswich council facilities
Dear Editor,
On my first visit to Ipswich in March, 1942, I was
profoundly impressed me with the friendly, outgoing nature of all the residents
who I had the good fortune to meet. Subsequent visits over the years to Ipswich
and locations in OZ, have confirmed the accuracy of my first impression.
I was shocked to learn the use of Ipswich council
facilities are being denied to the most courageous of all Ipswich residents,
Pauline Hanson, who by her her actions and those of her supporters, has brought
the microscope of attention of the world's freedom-loving people on
Ipswich!
For shame, residents of Ipswich who have permitted
this to happen.
john hamilton - USA
Subject: One Nation banned!
To the Editor,
Queensland Times "news"paper,
I was very disappointed to hear that Pauline Hanson's
One Nation has been banned from using the Ipswich City Council's facilities
for meetings in Pauline's own electorate of Blair. The trumped-up reason
is to protect council staff from danger due to protests. What a laugh!
It is rumoured that left-wing radical groups afiliated
with the Australian Labor party have organised many of the protests against
One Nation employing (literally) some rather naive university students. It
is well known that the Mayor of Ipswich, John Nugent, and the infamous councillor
Paul Tulley are both Labor supporters. Do Mssrs Nugent and Tulley have prior
knowledge of future protests? Do they fear that One Nation might finally
give the Australian voters some say in how Australia is managed.
Remember that One Nation recently received nearly 25%
of the vote in Queensland in spite of a blatantly biased media campaign against
them. The whole world is watching the suppression of free speech in Australia.
I trust that this decision will be reversed.
Kevin Wildash (Manila)
Subject: King Canute
King Canute, the famous Saxon King, when surrounded
by sycophants, was told he was so powerful he could turn back the tide. He
adjourned to the seaside and His supporter was made to realise that Time
and Tide wait for no man.
Beware , Ladies and gentlemen of the Ipswich Shire
Council, It is an offence against the laws of the Commonwealth, Section 28
of the Crimes Act 1914 to interfere with the Political liberty of Pauline
Hanson's supporters. You appear to heve been doing this by withholding
facillities from Our Lady Pauline.
Be warned, you may be prosecuted individually and
collectively by any citizen under section 13 Crimes Act 1914 and it could
cost you $99,000 in fines.
Be sensible and reverse your decision.
Peter Gargan
To The Editor,
Reference:
Banning of One Nation Party from use of Ipswich City
council facilitiies by the Council.
Dear Sir,
I have heard that the Ipswich City Council has banned
the use of city council facilities (including the council hall) by One Nation
Party on the grounds of "protecting council staff from danger"!
We have had meetings in South Australia by One Nation
Party and of course these have attracted the usual motley group of dissenters
& thugs who tried to break up the meetings by intimidation and thuggish
behaviour.Fortunately in S.A. the Police Force will not tolerate such
demonstrations designed to prevent ordinary citizens from exercising their
rights to attend meetings of ANY political party. I am quite certain the
Queensland Police are just as capable as our own and therefore the action
of the Council is clearly not instigated by concern for its servants but
more by a misguided (and probably unconstitutional) illegal effort to assist
the Australian Labour Party who like the Liberals are threatened by a wave
of support for One Nation all over Australia.
This action will be seen as another example of the
hypocrisy of all existing major Political Parties who are for ever sounding
off about "freedom of speech", "freedom of assembly" etc but when their perceived
power & position is threatened will stoop to any dirty trick available
to deny ordinary citizens these "rights"!
Such actions as that taken by the Council are a denial
of citizens rights and I have no doubt what taxpayers will think of such
undemocratic behaviour.These humbugs deserve to be turfed out of office as
the next council election.
Yours Sincerely,
David Hughes-Jones
Subject:
Comments on Australian
News of the Day
Christopher Jack wrote:
> My question is that how are we being discriminated
against? Who is discriminating
> against us? Do you seriously believe you are being discriminated against
because
> you are white?
It never ceases to amaze me the shallow thinking that
seems to have struck the population in the last decade in this country. Isn't
it enough that ATSIC has absorbed thousands of dollars for every working
person in Australia over the past years without any visible improvment in
the conditions of aborigines?
I just can't believe the commonly accepted nonsense
that aborigines must own most of Australia because aborigines were here before
Europeans. There are so many flaws in this thinking...
Just the mere fact that you have to use the names of
races (ie "aborigine" and "European") in order to express the concept implies
that there is racism going on here.
Let's say for the sake of argument that when Captain
Philip arrived in Australia there had been exactly one aborigine on the entire
continent. Does that mean this person must own the entire continent?
For the same reason, I have no problem saying that
aborigines should own land that they are actually using. But the number of
aborigines is few, and the country is sparsely populated with them. The amount
of land they can actually be using can't be any more than a few percent.
They should own this land. But land they don't regularly use should belong
to all the people of Australia.
The other big flaw in the whole aboriginal industry
is identifying who exactly is supposed to be the beneficiary of all this
special status. Which genes exactly put aborigines at a disdvantage compared
to everyone else? Black Americans have come to this country and faced no
discrimination. Asians, Indians and Africans have come to this country and
made very successful lives here. What is the problem with aborigines that
they can't? Of course, they can if they want to. And if we stop treating
them like cripples and a handicapped underclass they will get out and make
lives for themselves, proud and independant. Until then they will be despised
by the rest of the country because they havn't got the guts to do what even
Vietnamese Refugees have been able to do:- Learn to live on their own two
feet.
Let the Government keep on helping aborigines. But
only when their plight is defined by some criteria that could include people
of any race. Aborigines havn't got a mortgage on problems in this country.
Let the Government redefine the rules so they will be helped because they
need it, rather than race. If they really are so needy they will lose nothing.
What are you so frighted of ATSIC?
Please withhold name.
Subject: Re ..Christopher Jack
Dear Sir,
perhaps C.Jack could try voting in ATSIC elections
,to decide where the billions of Australian tax dollars are spent. Is he
of the correct racial extraction?
He could also try applying for a job with ATSIC or
a myriad of Aboriginal organisations.
He will find that the vast majority of them are closed
to certain races of people.Will he be accepted?
He could try to cross the" Aboriginal Lands" in central
Australia with out paying the "access fees" and " application fees" . If
he is of the wrong race he will be fined.
Does he have children at school? I doubt it ,because
he would know that certain races obtain payments and services not available
to other races in the school system.
Does he wish to start a Business? Certain races can
obtain very low interest loans (1.5%) from funds provided by Australian tax
revenue. Does he qualify?
Does he have a legal problem? Depending on his racial
group , he will find legal aid either extemely difficult to obtain ,or extremely
easy, which one applies to him?
Is he perhaps unemployed? Perhaps he qualifies for
Community Development Work? It depends on which race he belongs to . This
also determines"unemployment numbers" for his race,which in turn attracts
further funding for " successful" employment programs, but is strictly race
related. I hope he would qualify for this help.
Perhaps he would like to have new neighbours and move
to some of our vast interior lands,in this wonderful country of ours? Well
that is fine , except, he will find that some restrictions exist where Native
Title claimants seek exclusive rights to possession,and usage,over all others.
These rights apply only to members of the Claimant tribe or family and are
of course,racially determined. Can he still go to these areas?
Perhaps he feels he has strong cultural and family
ties to a certain area and would like to claim it as his own? This attracts
vast legal resources and anthropological services to help him determine his
claim to the land,funded entirely by Australian taxpayers and not available
to his opponents, any current legal occupiers of that land. There is just
one small qualifier. To which race does he belong? Any ATSIC office will
help him determine whether he qualifies or not.
Good luck with your quest for instances of racisim
in Australia ,Christopher,I bet you cant find any!
Regards
Steve Nichols
Subject: Comments on Australian News of the Day
To Christopher Jack
I don't know which, if any, political party you might
support. I think it is good that you have taken the time to present your
views regarding One Nation. I think that you will have to concede that freedom
of speech is a doctrine that One Nation practices and the rest just talk
about. If you don't believe me try posting an open bulletin on the web page
of any other Party.
On the matter of discrimination in the work place,
have you read the job adds in some of our regional papers which state openly
that only Aboriginals are to apply? Followed by the disclaimer that positive
discrimination in favour of Aboriginals does not contravene the Discrimination
Act. Do you know what would happen to me if I placed an add suggesting that
only white people need apply?
Have you had a look at the Uni. places set aside for
Aboriginals and can't be reallocated to non Aboriginals even if they cannot
be filled? Have you had a look at the relative entrance requirements for
Aboriginals?
My niece, her husband and children live in a suburb
which has several Aboriginal families. Her children could not go on the last
three school excursions because they could not afford it. The Aboriginal
children went, compliments of the Australian Taxpayer.
Her children use excercise books with one subject at
the front & one at the back. The Aboriginal children need no such savings
as they receive their school books and materials free including unlimited
replacements when they are lost or damaged.
It would be true to say that in that suburb the Aboriginal
& non Aboriginal families don't talk to each other. My niece obviously
resents the fact that her children are being actively discriminated against
on the basis of the colour of their skin. It is probably also true that the
grievances of the Aboriginal families are equally valid in a number of
areas.
We currently have a Government that makes one set of
laws for Aboriginals and another set of laws for non Aboriginals. While ever
that situation exists we will have injustice and anger on all sides. Quite
frankly, no amount of cash, either printed or thrown at you from the Treasury
will make one iota of difference.
I know many people of my parent's generation who voted
at the 1967 referendum and every single one of them voted believing that
it was a vote to ensure equality for Aboriginals. It was one of the highest
yes results at referendum in this country, proving that Australians are,
or were against discrimination and, if I may add, at a time when it was not
internationally trendy or politically correct to think that way. Do you really
believe that any one of those voters would have voted to give Government
the right to discriminate against white people instead of the Aboriginals?
If you were an Aboriginal would you really consider that to be a fair
outcome?
You and I have a right to different views and expectations.
We have a vibrant country when we have the freedom to openly debate those
differences and pursue our different goals. To preserve those rights we must
demand that Government treats with all it's citizens openly and equally.
Anything else is a recipe for the Chaos we are currently experiencing.
Maree S
Subject: In support of Pauline Hanson
Lets keep our culture
Lets remain in the same country as we grew
For we can grow old and lose everthing we remember as Australia
This is not a coup against nationality
But a strength in keeping what we have
We've always welcomed and always helped
But its time to start remembering ourselves again
When I walk down the main street of certain suburbs
of sydney and I see shopfront signs displaying foriegn languages inwhich
I cannot read with no english, I wonder what rights we have left. It's not
only single shops anymore but whole streets, even suburbs.
I have many foreign friends who love this country and
our culture. I respect them because they respect Australia without any idea
of change.
While Pauline Hanson is the only strong enough political
and ethical person to forward these issues I shall support her in everyway.
I do believe she is the only true Australian politician that we have.
Pauline is speaking for us as a country. The only person
that I can see speaking of issues that most so called Australian politicians
seem to forget.
I do not believe that anybody looking after their own
culture are being disrespectful in anyway.
I do not see policies in this country happening anywhere
else in the world.
Pauline Hanson, a breeze of realism in a political
confusion.
Where ever Pauline's name is on the next ballot paper
does not matter.
From what I can see she has enough strength behind
her anyway.
One Nation is bringing a country together. Nothing
is stronger than that.
Jason Wain
Letters to the Editor
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
EMERALD - (Saturday, July 18, 1998) - Telstra
may not need to be sold! The National Competition Policy, will ensure its
demise, from within. Akin to having Dracula in charge of the Blood Bank?
Ingenious, isn’t it?
Yours,
R. Crozier.
Another perfect day in paradise.
Have a good one.
Recent stories exclusive to
(how to)
subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:
The Ipswich City
Council re-institute a ban against Pauline Hanson - 19th July 1998
The One Nation
mailing list published in the Australia/Israeli Review - 9th July
1998
The Barbara Hazelton
betrayal - 2nd July 1998
Pauline Hanson's
One Nation Queensland State MPs meet in Parliament - 27th June 1998
QANTAS censor Pauline
Hanson - 24th June 1998
"Paul" (Big "K")
Costello's lies - 22nd June 1998
Live coverage
of Queensland State Elections - 13th June 1998
Beattie's preference
lies exposed - 11th June 1998
Launch of
One Nation state policies - 8th June 1998
Sixty Minutes break
new barriers in unethical reporting - 6th June 1998
Ray Martin revelas
his spots when challenging Pauline Hanson on A Current Affair - 4th
June 1998
The backlash to
Ray Martin's unethical behaviour during his interview with Pauline
Hanson.- 4th June 1998
Return to Australian National
News of the Day
#
See GLOBE International for
other world news.
anotd
