The tribes of Israel

The latest Essential Research poll turns up a mixed bag of views on the Israel Folau controversy. Also featured: prospects for an indigenous recognition referendum and yet more Section 44 eruptions.

The latest of Essential Research’s fortnightly polls, which continue to limit themselves to issue questions in the wake of the great pollster failure, focuses mostly on the Israel Folau controversy. Respondents registered high levels of recognition of the matter, with 22% saying they had been following it closely, 46% that they had “read or seen some news”, and another 17% saying they were at least “aware”.

Probing further, the poll records very strong support for what seem at first blush to be some rather illiberal propositions, including 64% agreement with the notion that people “should not be allowed to argue religious freedom to abuse others”. However, question wording would seem to be very important here, as other questions find an even split on whether Folau “has the right to voice his religious views, regardless of the hurt it could cause others” (34% agree, 36% disagree), and whether there should be “stronger laws to protect people who express their religious views in public” (38% agree, 38% disagree). Furthermore, 58% agreed that “employers should not have the right to dictate what their employees say outside work”, which would seem to encompass the Folau situation.

Respondents were also asked who would benefit and suffer from the federal government’s policies over the next three years, which, typically for a Coalition government, found large companies and corporations expected to do best (54% good, 11% bad). Other results were fairly evenly balanced, the most negative findings relating to the environment (26% good, 33% bad) and, funnily enough, “older Australians” (26% good, 38% bad). The economy came in at 33% good and 29% bad, and “Australia in general” at 36% good and 27% bad. The poll was conducted last Tuesday to Saturday from a sample of 1099.

Also of note:

• A referendum on indigenous recognition may be held before the next election, after Aboriginal Affairs Minister Ken Wyatt’s announcement on Wednesday that he would pursue a consensus option for a proposal to go before voters “during the current parliamentary term”. It is clear the government would not be willing to countenance anything that went further than recognition, contrary to the Uluru Statement from the Heart’s call for a “First Nations Voice enshrined in the Constitution” – a notion derided as a “third chamber of parliament” by critics, including Scott Morrison.

• A paper in the University of Western Australia Law Review keeps the Section 44 pot astir by suggesting 26 current members of federal parliament may fall foul by maintaining a “right of abode” in the United Kingdom – a status allowing “practically the same rights” as citizenship even where citizenship has been formally renounced. The status has only been available to British citizens since 1983, but is maintained by citizens of Commonwealth countries who held it before that time, which they could do through marriage or descent. This could potentially be interpreted as among “the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power”, as per the disqualifying clause in Section 44. Anyone concerned by this has until the end of the month to challenge an election result within the 40 day period that began with the return of the writs on June 21. Action beyond that point would require referral by the House of Representatives or the Senate, as appropriate.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,966 comments on “The tribes of Israel”

  1. Boerwar says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:29 am

    BiM
    (My parents are dead so it is probably wise to leave them out of the debate.)

    You were the one who introduced them into it.

  2. ‘ItzaDream says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:27 am

    Nicholas @ #639 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 10:25 am

    Pill testing at places where a lot of young people congregate is just good practice harm minimization.’

    Well, this is a nice rest from the MMT!

    As noted above, ‘pill testing’ is a piss poor context for a general policy discussion on legalizing all drugs for all ages.

    What are some of the implications of the above general statement.

    ‘Young people’ congregate at school. Pill testing at primary schools? Pill testing at secondary schools?
    Ten year old kid barrels up with an Ice hit and kit. Pill testing confirms it is Ice. Don’t do it, kid, but off you go. Your choice.

    Ice with your play lunch?

  3. Laurence Tribe
    ‏Verified account @tribelaw
    6h6 hours ago

    Question:

    Who in the George W. Bush Justice Department approved then US Attorney Alex Acosta’s disgraceful sweetheart deal with human trafficker and child rapist Jeffrey Epstein — the deal of the century?

    Asking for a friend.

  4. ‘Barney in Makassar says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 10:45 am

    Boerwar,

    Your parents must have been so proud in having such a perfect child.’’

    I think this was the first reference. If I referred to my parents before this, then my bad. If not, then BiM bad.

  5. As our custodian surely you must have an absolute position on all moral conundrums?

    I do, wondering if there is a quid in it.

    OK. I will ditch the label. I am fairly sure GG was not aiming it at me (at least not me alone).

    It is quite catchy tho, dont you think.

  6. Simon² Katich® @ #658 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 10:56 am

    I’ve adjusted my feelings toward you,

    Really? Becuase he has a different opinion on the laws around drug taking?

    No.

    Firstly, it isn’t ‘just’ about drug taking. It is about a small subset of drug taking. It is about pill testing. It is about harm minimisation. And it is about caring for people who are unable to care for themselves. (It’s why we have breathalysers.)

    It is not his opinion so much that worries me. It is his total disavowal of expert opinions. I am now guarded about what he writes, that’s all. He has given me pause to doubt him. Prior, I took his thoughts in about subjects I knew less about. reasonably seriously. Nothing new here. What you take on board is very much guided by what you think about someone.

    No biggie. As I said, it’s a bit sad, for me.

  7. I’m a bit dubious about any argument which suggests that a teenager deserves what they get because they weren’t brought up to make good life decisions….

    I used to be against prostitution. I was, however, for legalising prostitution because it’s obvious we can’t stop it, so it may as well be controlled.

    I used to be anti abortion. I was,however, for legalising abortion because it’s obvious we can’t stop it so it may as well be controlled.

    I’ve never taken a recreational drug in my life. However, we know that, despite it being illegal, people take them at parties and people die. We also know that, if the same people are allowed to test their drugs at parties, less of them do.

    So testing drugs saves lives, which is really all that needs to be known.

  8. Boerwar,

    Apologies, after further checking, I did make the first reference to your parents, but there were certainly no negative aspersions cast on them in that comment.

  9. self appointed moral custodians of PB @ #703 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 11:39 am

    As our custodian surely you must have an absolute position on all moral conundrums?

    I do, wondering if there is a quid in it.

    OK. I will ditch the label. I am fairly sure GG was not aiming it at me (at least not me alone).

    It is quite catchy tho, dont you think.

    Like syphilis. One person gets it. Then everyone has it!

  10. ‘Barney in Makassar says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:42 am

    Boerwar,

    Apologies, after further checking, I did make the first reference to your parents, but there were certainly no negative aspersions cast on them in that comment.’

    no worries.

  11. nath says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:17 am
    GG. Good to see you have finally manned up and come back to PB after a couple months of sulking after the election like a little bitch. Hopefully the defeat of Shorten did not force you to cry too much.

    _________________________________________

    I can’t speak for GG, but it’s the conduct and bullying and obsessive nastiness of arseholes like you and LVT that have reduced my posting by about 90%. Most days I can’t be bothered wading through your ugly bile and venom.

  12. Dan Gulberry @ #670 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 11:07 am

    The best way to stop kids taking drugs is for the parents to start using them.

    The Portugese experience is that the way to stop kids taking drugs is to legalise them. I have friends (doctors) in the Netherlands, and they tell me the same thing, from their own lives, as well as their observations.

  13. self appointed moral custodians of PB says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:39 am

    As our custodian surely you must have an absolute position on all moral conundrums?

    I do, wondering if there is a quid in it.

    OK. I will ditch the label. I am fairly sure GG was not aiming it at me (at least not me alone).

    It is quite catchy tho, dont you think.

    No, don’t go.

    I was just trying to establish your framework, something I’m presently undertaking here in Makassar.

    Yours seems much simpler than here. 🙂

  14. briefly @ #650 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 10:42 am

    Join Labor. Oppose the repression of working people. Fight.

    By all means join Labor. This will help in some areas, such as inequality and social justice issues. Possibly also education and health, although the “Americanisation” of both of these is likely to continue even under Labor.

    Just don’t expect it to fix everything. For some problems – like global warming- it is too late for political fixes. Especially here in Australia, where we were already decades late in taking even the minimum necessary actions, and where we show little inclination for doing anything meaningful for the next decade or two either … even as we watch our environment and our fossil-fuel based economy disintegrating around us.

    I still believe a global solution is possible. But Australia will not really participate in it, no matter who is in government. Not until we are forced to do so – no doubt kicking and screaming at how unfair it all is – by international trade sanctions. Or worse.

  15. ItzaDream says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:40 am

    Simon² Katich® @ #658 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 10:56 am

    I’ve adjusted my feelings toward you,

    Really? Becuase he has a different opinion on the laws around drug taking?

    No.

    Firstly, it isn’t ‘just’ about drug taking. It is about a small subset of drug taking. It is about pill testing. It is about harm minimisation. And it is about caring for people who are unable to care for themselves. (It’s why we have breathalysers.)’

    Setting the bounds at raves is not a sustainable policy boundary for either age group or drug type limitations. We can’t simply say that we are going to do barley charley for raves only. Essentially the signal is open slather. It follows that policy discussions around pill testing are essentially policy discussions around general drug use. It further follows that if you approve pill testing at raves you would have to explain why no pill testing at any other venues and for any other drugs and for any other ages.

  16. BiM
    I am sure it is somewhere on Sulawesi (or is it Malaku) that an ethnic group have an interesting end of harvest and dig up the dead festival. As part of this festival all the rules of the tribe are tossed out. Drugs, orgies… just for one day.

  17. Having a look through my tax return where they break down where my tax went I noticed that ‘Dole Bludgers” cost me a whole $4.10 per week. If you consider NewStart as income insurance, what a bargain ! Check out how much income insurance costs in the private sector .

    Considering how little extra it would cost for a decent increase to it (and how cheap an income insurance it is) it really does show a failure on the part of our political class. ( All parties).

  18. Boerwar @ #722 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 11:52 am

    ItzaDream says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 11:40 am

    Simon² Katich® @ #658 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 10:56 am

    I’ve adjusted my feelings toward you,

    Really? Becuase he has a different opinion on the laws around drug taking?

    No.

    Firstly, it isn’t ‘just’ about drug taking. It is about a small subset of drug taking. It is about pill testing. It is about harm minimisation. And it is about caring for people who are unable to care for themselves. (It’s why we have breathalysers.)’

    Setting the bounds at raves is not a sustainable policy boundary for either age group or drug type limitations. We can’t simply say that we are going to do barley charley for raves only. Essentially the signal is open slather. It follows that policy discussions around pill testing are essentially policy discussions around general drug use. It further follows that if you approve pill testing at raves you would have to explain why no pill testing at any other venues and for any other drugs and for any other ages.

    Bw, all I am saying is what the experts in the field are saying. You are not an expert in this field. There is nothing more to debate. I will simply fall back on what the experts are telling us. Well, there might be room for debate about whether they are experts or not, but I certainly give them more credence than you.

    Your disregard for the recklessness of youth, because it turns out you survived it (as did I, btw), has shocked me. Allow me that.

  19. Peter Dutton and Pezzullo are a danger to democracy, yet we are asked to believe that he has a sense of humour.

    Michael Taylor@AusIndiMedia

    In another time, and another place, the shirts started out Brown, then segued to Black. It appears that Australia chose to avoid an interim and simply raced to the dark side.

  20. ‘Setting the bounds at raves is not a sustainable policy boundary for either age group or drug type limitations. We can’t simply say that we are going to do barley charley for raves only..’

    Except we do do this in all areas of policy.

    Pill testing is proposed for organised, large scale events, where it is known that there’s a high likelihood of illicit drug taking. There’s a target audience within a very small area.

    Setting up a pill testing facility somewhere where there is sporadic illicit drug taking by individuals at random times wouldn’t have the same benefits.

    In the same way, we send police to big public events, where we know there’s likely to be trouble. We don’t have them randomly dropping into people’s homes just to check.

  21. ITZA
    I hear you brother.
    If they come from a hell believing background the life of adolescents is not great, gay or not. Eating meat on Friday was just one of innumerable challenges that could lead to a life-time of self-loathing and worse. In the end people reject the whole load of crap, go Catholic-lite and come to some accomodation or have a life-time of self-doubt.
    Folau wasn’t helpful but his attitude is nothing new to adolsecent Hell believers. He has now become the focus of the KulturKampf

  22. I’ve never heard anyone supporting pill testing advocate that it is a solution to the problem.

    They recognise illicit drug taking is a dangerous practice and the aim is to minimise some of those dangers.

    The solutions to the problem probably lie elsewhere and yet much of the opposition seems to be argued from the point, it’s not an absolute solution.

    That has never been the claim.

  23. ‘Itsa
    Bw, all I am saying is what the experts in the field are saying. You are not an expert in this field. There is nothing more to debate. I will simply fall back on what the experts are telling us. ‘

    What do the experts say about pill testing at primary schools so that the Ice the children have is 100% pure?

  24. ‘Barney in Makassar says:
    Saturday, July 13, 2019 at 12:05 pm

    I’ve never heard anyone supporting pill testing advocate that it is a solution to the problem.’

    The policy issue the advocates avoid is whether they support limiting their preferred public policy settings to raves and to those old enough to be let into raves.

    BTW, do they test Ice at raves?

  25. FWIW

    I support the initiatives relating to the application of mind bending substances to curing mental health issues. IMO, again FWIW, the potential for curing, for example PTSD, is very promising.

    Conflating this issue with the General Public Policy on Drug Use is, IMO, poor form.

  26. Some people want young people to suffer for their wrong choices, including dying at raves for taking a pill. It makes them feel better for not having experimented and being wild when they were young. It validates their insulated life when they can point to overdosed youth and say: ‘see! poor choices. Unlike me, who never did that shit’.

  27. The hearts of young city dwellers contain billions of toxic air pollution particles, research has revealed.

    Even in the study’s youngest subject, who was three, damage could be seen in the cells of the organ’s critical pumping muscles that contained the tiny particles. The study suggests these iron-rich particles, produced by vehicles and industry, could be the underlying cause of the long-established statistical link between dirty air and heart disease.

    The scientists said the abundance of the nanoparticles might represent a serious public health concern and that particle air pollution must be reduced urgently. More than 90% of the world’s population lives with toxic air, according to the World Health Organization, which has declared the issue a global “public health emergency”.

    The scientists acknowledged some uncertainties in their research, but Prof Barbara Maher, of Lancaster University, said: “This is a preliminary study in a way, but the findings and implications were too important not to get the information out there.”

    Maher and colleagues found in 2016 that the same nanoparticles were present in human brains and were associated with Alzheimers-like damage, another disease linked to air pollution.

    https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/12/billions-of-air-pollution-particles-found-in-hearts-of-city-dwellers

  28. We have new neighbours coming to dinner. The minestrone is ready in the big pot, just waiting for some shredded spinach to be added before it is reheated. OH makes brilliant cheesy sippets. I have to get an old fashioned Irish Stew underway – floured chump chops, herbs, lots of onion, celery, carrots, lots of carrots, some potato and parsnip, stock, you know. With a big bowl of mashed potato. (There’s grandchildren involved, and it’s cold as). She’s bringing the pudding.

    So I’m off to light the fire, and get my hands dirty.

    No ill will involved this morning; spare us that.

    But in what seems like wanting the last word, I have to repost this – it’s all I want to say. It’s what started me off today. I don’t have children. I wasn’t that lucky.

    “The idea of believing that saying to young people in possession of drugs ‘just say no’ is an effective message represents either a phenomenal misunderstanding of how the adolescent mind works, or just a lack of concern,” the emergency doctor and pill-testing advocate David Caldicott said this week.

  29. ItzaDream @ #714 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 9:45 am

    Dan Gulberry @ #670 Saturday, July 13th, 2019 – 11:07 am

    The best way to stop kids taking drugs is for the parents to start using them.

    The Portugese experience is that the way to stop kids taking drugs is to legalise them. I have friends (doctors) in the Netherlands, and they tell me the same thing, from their own lives, as well as their observations.

    You’re quite right. My comment was of course tongue in cheek.

    There are a number of benefits to legalisation purely from an economic and legal points of view:

    1) The billions that are flowing out of the economy would be forced back into the economy where every step can be taxed (PAYG income tax, corporate tax, GST, “sin” tax a la booze and ciggies);
    2) Drug barons would be instantly out of business;
    3) Police/politician corruption would be reduced.

    There are many others, including the creation of legitimate jobs as well as small businesses to produce, process and retail the “products”.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *