The latest weekly Essential Research has Labor’s lead at 58-42, down from 60-40 last week and 62-38 the week before. Also featured are yet more questions on the global financial crisis and one on the recent activities of Peter Costello, of which most respondents take a dim view. Also:
• The government’s second go at the Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill passed the House of Representatives yesterday. Daryl Melham, Labor’s member for Banks and chair of the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, had some harsh words during the debate for Family First Senator Steve Fielding, who joined with the Coalition to reject the earlier version of the bill in the Senate last week.
• The redistribution of Tasmanian electorates (which uniquely applies to both federal and state elections) has been finalised, with only minor amendments to the boundaries as originally proposed. These have very slightly weakened Labor’s position in both Braddon and Franklin. More from Antony Green.
• The Electoral Commissioner has determined quotas for Queensland and New South Wales, the first stage in the redistributions that will give a new seat to the first at the expense of the second.
I don’t understand how ACMA has the authority to blacklist a site such as WikiLeaks, which does not contain or link to any offensive material. I don’t even understand how it has the authority to have a _secret_ blacklist. This is very Orwellian.
Ok …. Radio Australia is playing the Senate today ….. will only get the HOR when at home with TV and/or net connection 🙁
Socrates
A friend’s friend is big in a Clean Energy company, CEO of it or something. He’s been big on geothermal and had lots of shares in it. But he’s losing faith in it. It’s not working ATM. Evidently there are too many fissures in the rocks they are using and the steam keeps escaping and they can’t set up the circuits. And tidal only looks viable on the Nullarbor, where the cost of getting the energy to Perth or Adelaide will be prohibitive.
Someone needs to be closely tracking the progress of RE and it’s success. I really want it to work but we need to know how much, if any, of the slack might need to be taken up by nuclear. I hope it’s none, but if RE isn’t delivering it’s promises, we need to know.
[But Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull described the disputed issue as “tiny”.
“It’s one the Government should accept,” he said on Sky News.
“The unions will be completely stunned that Kevin Rudd is going to hold up his Fair Work Bill … on this one point of definition.”
He accused Mr Rudd and Workplace Relations Minister Julia Gillard of being the only two people wanting to keep the Howard government’s Work Choices alive.
“They’re like the two doctors in Frankenstein’s laboratory – they’re the ones putting the electric current into Work Choices, they’re keeping it alive.” ]
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,25214582-5005962,00.html
HAHAHAHAHA
#1552 juliem
From your other posts it sounds as though RA is similar to News Radio, which says it’s going to the HOR when it sits (whenever that will be).
Triton 1551
Wikileaks is working fine. I presume that it’s server was overloaded by requests yesterday so it became inaccessible.
However, Wikileaks does indeed contain huge lists of links to offensive material, eg the probably fake list attributed as an ACMA “blacklist”.
The so called blacklist just seems to be a list of links which is being compiled to allow the authority to experiment and explain how a internet filter mechanism might work. Anyone is allowed to compile a list of links. No-one is stopped accessing such links.
Given such a purpose it is reasonanble to try to keep the list secret. But again anyone is allowed to keep a secret list of links. Eg, most of us want our internet bookmarks secret: they are private.
There are plenty of more or less secret lists in ICT regulation, eg the list of do not call phone numbers.
Dio
Yes getting Geothermal to work is still a huge engineering challenge. I’m not aware of anyone who has done it yet. But wind power works well now with current technology.
You are right about nuclear too – frankly 3rd and 4th generation plants are not that bad (not cheap but safe and reliable) regardless of what the Greens might say. They are probably cheaper than clean coal, which also hasn’t been made to work yet, and costs a fortune (+30 to 50% on power plant cost, can’t easily be retrofitted ot older plants, and permanently reduces efficiency). There is a good discussion at Barry Brook’s Brave New Climate blog, which I recommend.
Looking at what actually works now, that really only leaves Solar/SHGas, Wind and Nuclear as non emitting options.
One thing to add Dio – plug in electric cars could be a great boon for wind and solar, because you can use them to store the excess power when they generate. That combination could greatly improve Solar economics, and make wind power even more attractive. Plug in hyrbids are scheduled to be sold from 2010 (Toyota), 2011 (Honda) and 2012 (GM).
Dr Good
The problem with a blacklist is that it needs to be disseminated to all the ISPs and they block the sites on the list. All it takes is one pissed off geek to leak the list and it will spread to widely and fast that a whole smorgasboard of banned sites will be freely available. It will be counterproductive.
Trition, thanks much, Radio Australia is News Radio [two different names for the same thing I guess? ;-)] …… the HOR feed on the net is blank at the moment with elevator music so it makes sense …..
#1556
Okay then. The Age is misleading then, with:
[Access to Wikileaks has been blocked.]
I found that hard to believe, since I didn’t think any blocking had legislative authority yet.
I still don’t understand why the list should be secret, though, or is it only secret until the legislation passes? Yes, other things such as Do Not Call are secret, but they are private. This is a list of _publicly_ accessible sites. People will know a site is on the list when they can’t access it, and making it public is necessary so it gets the necessary public scrutiny as to whether a site should be on the list. It’s Big Brother otherwise.
[The so called blacklist just seems to be a list of links which is being compiled to allow the authority to experiment and explain how a internet filter mechanism might work.]
No.
It’s already the ACMA’s “blacklist”. This already exists, prior to the filter being implemented. That list will be extended to 10,000 websites, not necessarily illegal, just what some ACMA bureaucrat thinks is “unwanted” (Completely different to the Classification Board) and then compulsorily enforced.
Someone should point out to Turnbull (and the public) that the “tiny” change from 15 to 20 employees affects 700,000 workers
If all the sites are going to be blocked, what’s the point of keeping the list secret?
Not like we’ll be able to access it anyway…
[If all the sites are going to be blocked, what’s the point of keeping the list secret?
Not like we’ll be able to access it anyway…]
1. It is a shopping list of extreme naughtiness.
2. It is relatively easy to get around the filter.
Geodynamics are in the process of commissiong a 1mw geothermal power plant to power a mining community for BHP (I think) as proof of concept. There were not leaks and fissues and such that caused them any difficulty. In fact they achieved better than expected flows and a greater resevoir of heat.
The only problem they had was on an additional scoping hole that they drilled when the bit got jammed at about 3km. That particular hole has been plugged.
Geothermal is quite viable.
http://www.geodynamics.com.au/IRM/content/home.html
Andrew
“Someone should point out to Turnbull (and the public) that the “tiny” change from 15 to 20 employees affects 700,000 workers”
Rudd and Gillard should point that out at every opportunity – it greatly strengthens their case.
TP
Thanks, interested to see that. That still reinforces the previous point about the grid. My understanding is that most geothermal sites are not well served by our current power grid.
Andrew 1563
That is exactly the point, if a business of 20 people is struggling and losing money, if they lay off 1 or 2 people and get sued, all 20 people can lose their jobs as the business go bankrupt (to pay legal cost and penalties)
These business employs 700,000 people, this amendment will protect the jobs of 700,000 from the above scenario. The lack of ability to lay off worker was one of the reason so many companies went bankrupt in 1987.
The question is the right of a few people’s ability to sue, compared with the jobs of the rest of the people at the firm. Should 15 or 20 people be the cutoff?
Xenophon is like any other politician and doen’t like being attacked.
X has a large support but even so he will feel very uncomfortable on anyone campaigning that he sold 700,000 Australian workers down the drain for no reason but … he could / grandstanding. He might be safe but the prospect of a running mate diminishes if ammunition comes along that exposes him.
Xenophon especially trades on a white knight shiny look after the people image, so is susceptible to attacks that point out hypocracy or dishonesty to the image. These type of people should be careful, whilst they may seem beyond challenge they can be like a mirror, perfect one minute, but shattered the next. That is the danger of trading on PR and image alone.
I know people will continue to love him despite his intention to make 700,000 easier to sack during a recession (good on ya nick your a real friend of the people). Those people are simply overwhelmed by love of the manufactured image.
What’s to stop “semi-links” of the entire list being published? E.g., http://verynaughtysiteRemoveThisPart.com
I’d be interested in how the legislation will be framed to outlaw all forms in which the list might be published.
I think people forget what we are talking about here. It is giving the ability for business to UNFAIRLY sack people.
All businesses can get rid of staff at any time, for real reasons. This is where the conservatives, xenophon and fielding make themselves objectionable people – they are saying they don’t care if 700,000 can be sacked for unfair reasons (and the list is endles) and if fact more than not caring they want to make sure it is reality by voting with the neo Howards.
#1572
That’s the position of the Greens. They want the number to be zero for that reason.
[2. It is relatively easy to get around the filter.]
Thank you.
Pointless waste of time and money.
TP 1572
Agreed. It is precisely the (false) arguments like Dovifs at 1569 that are trotted out to justify the sort of unfair sackings that you refer to. Economic necessity is a fair reason to sack someone. Also, like the Paxton family, I’d defy Dovif to name any firms that have actually closed for that reason. Much like the Xtrata threat, badly run firms often use hard times as an excuse to avoid blame for bad management.
[I’d be interested in how the legislation will be framed to outlaw all forms in which the list might be published.]
The legislation that can fine people up to $11,000 a day for posting the links apparently already exists.
#1565
[1. It is a shopping list of extreme naughtiness.]
They must know that they can’t keep it secret so it’ll become like every other attempt to deny access to something. When anything is banned it becomes more popular than it ever would have been otherwise.
#1576 Oz
Yes, but my question was how does it deal with disguised links?
[Yes, but my question was how does it deal with disguised links?]
I have no idea, but the fact that the legislation exists means you could try and look it up and see what it says!
You mean actually read the law? That never occurred to me.
Jesus Christ.
Now Fielding says he’ll vote for the bill if the definition is 15 full time staff.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25214692-601,00.html
#1581
It’s not clear whether X will accept 15 also. In any case, full-time equivalent could be a stumbling block. Last night Senator Ludwig pointed out what a nightmare it could be for a business to calculate this rather than do a simple head count.
wonder how many workers 15 FTE as opposed to head count leaves out??
TP
I’m glad to see that geothermal worked there. It might be that it is quite site-specific and they need to choose the right geological formations, which might take them a while to work out.
If anyone watched the excruitiating goings on the Senate late last night, with Bishop asking basically the same question over and over and over….thank god the Greens decided to hurry their amenments along all in bunches and withdrawing some.
[Now Fielding says he’ll vote for the bill if the definition is 15 full time staff.]
It’s part time/casual that are the most vulnerable. And people often start on part time/casual before going in to full time… esp in the first year.
PS I’m still hoping Mr X votes for 15 FTE and passes the bill. I promise to write him a cross letter if he doesn’t. 🙂
HOR is not due to sit till at least 12.30.
I think that will be part of the saleable skills and techonology they will acquire the when where how and so forth of geothermal.
bob
Casuals are on a contract which is at the discretion of the employer. They don’t need to be sacked, you just don’t give them any shifts. Part-time is different.
ACMA admits it has a list which could be called a blacklist. However, this is a list of URLs (links) which there have been complaints about or which contain illegal material or which contain material that should be restricted (eg to over 18s or over 15s) but is accessible through the link without any sort of age check. At the moment this list is only used to be given to ISPs which voluntarily want to restrict access or to voluntary filter makers. It is also illegal to post links to these sites and lists of such links. This is all done under old legislation.
It seems perfectly sensible to me that such a list is kept and used for such purposes.
WE can also assume that such a list will have to form the basis of a government filter under any new laws.
The list is not really “secret” because you can verbally tell people what is on it. However, it could be misused so you are not allowed to publish it and certainly not allowed to put up the list of links on the web. It is given out to the organisations which use it for the above purposes.
I presume that you would also get in trouble for making publicly available but disguised versions of the links or lists of links if it could be argued that your purpose was to make them more accessible.
Also beware because some of the sites on such lists are illegal to access (under current legislation) so it is really irresponsible to publish the links in a way that people can easily (mis)use.
Oz 1574
It is only “easy” to get round any of the current filters or proposed government filters if you want to, have appropriate software, use the right ISPs and have appropriate permissions on the computer.
So this seems a pretty good system to me to stop accidental access by your average internet user and by kids in particular.
[It is only “easy” to get round any of the current filters or proposed government filters if you want to]
So people who want access to child porn will have no issues whatsoever in accessing it, but someone wanting information on abortion or euthanasia (not illegal to talk about, as far as I’m aware) will be unable to get it without breaking the law.
So, Dr Good, you don’t have a problem with some faceless bureaucrat deciding that, say, sites on euthanasia and fringe religions, among others (examples given by The Age), will be added to a _secret_ list of blocked websites?
[wonder how many workers 15 FTE as opposed to head count leaves out??]
15 employees x 40 hours = 600Hrs
600Hrs divided by 15 hrs = 40
So it could be up to 40 employees.
15 hours per week is the min per week per employee.
triton. faces: http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/pc=PC_1512
Okay, they have faces, but that’s not enough.
triton. more: http://www.acma.gov.au/WEB/STANDARD/TheBoardGetsNudeAndNaughty
#1595
But, as Senator Ludwig pointed out, there’s a minefield of trouble in the FTE calculation, e.g., how overtime is handled, businesses with continually varying hours, seasonal businesses.
bob its 15 full-time equivalents, which captures all staff
my question is that changing it from 15 head count to 15 full time equivalents will leave a number of workers unprotected- i wonder how many?? (obviously less than 700,000)