The ELECTION Thread

[mandurahmum]

maybe they will demonstrate some shackles for you smee

[Rebel*1*]

Well lucky for Julia she isn't a girl batting for her own team cause that would cause a veritable stroke for some conservative types.   Dare I say the word?  Lesbian?  lmao.    Just imagine the uproar.  Defacto status with a bloke is hard enough for some to simply mind their own business over.

Are we getting less intelligent in the 21st century ?    Does anyone recall just a few years ago, a female MP was kicked out of Parliament for breast feeding?  Like haven't we gotten over that kind of stupidity yet?   What was that about? 'breast envy'? What if Julia Gillard were a single woman?. Or an unmarried Mother?  Heaven forbid, would we need to have a 'find Julia a Husband' Campaign and a shotgun wedding?  lol.

I'm having a good giggle over it.

[*smee*]

well Im pretty sure that Im a lesbian ...does that mean I cant be PM ?

[*r3830*]

The government would also legislate for an energy price comparison website, so consumers could get "the best deal possible for their energy", Mr Robertson said.

Won't that be illuminating when it comes to monopolistic price fixing eh? 


Look at that! The old grocery watch website has finally found a use! Now that's recycling for ya!

[Rebel*1*]

LOL @ loco, and Smee, only if you're prepared to wear a 'frock'.  LOL.

[mandurahmum]

Now see I think that the breastfeeding was a stunt.  That lady knew the rules - but choose to broke them.  She knew she would be asked to leave - it had happened before with Kristie Marshall.  IMO she should have excused herself if she needed to feed her child, or done what most of us working mothers do - express milk beforehand so that the baby can be feed.

Breast feeding may be natural and wonderful - but that does not mean you can break the rules - you can fight to get them changed - and that is what she should have done.

I for one would not like to see female teachers breastfeeding in schools - because I know my son would not learn anything - he would be watching her boobs - because that is what teenage boys do.

I like a lot of mothers breastfeed my child - it was my choice - it was also my choice to work part time - so I made arrangements beforehand so that whilst I was being paid to work - I was working.

I also think that paid maternity leave whilst good in principal may also discourage employers from hiring young women - because if they get pregnant - they will have to hold that job open whilst they are on maternity leave, and pay the maternity allowance.

I am sorry if we choose to have children - why is it that the employers are the ones that are disadvantaged.

[*smee*]

yes breast feeding is a natural and wonderful thing .... so is copulation
and one could reasonably expect to be removed from the house of reps upon commencement of said natural act

in both instances its not the act thats wrong , just the time and place that it was being carried out

[mandurahmum]

yes breast feeding is a natural and wonderful thing .... so is copulation
and one could reasonably expect to be removed from the house of reps upon commencement of said natural act

in both instances its not the act thats wrong , just the time and place that it was being carried out

I agree. 

[mandurahmum]

http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/7653559/abbott-promises-drastic-fisheries-overhaul/

See he really does not care what West Australians think Polling last week in WA showed that 8-in-10 WA voters support high levels of marine protection and a recent independent economic study showed that marine sanctuaries would help boost our southwest tourism industries to $55 million per year," he said.

[bnwt]

Gillard faces more embarrassment


http://video.au.msn.com/watch/video/gillard-faces-more-embarrassment/xq442wc


hahahahhahahahaha

[mandurahmum]

Now this is more embarrassing for Mr Abbott

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/even-tony-abbott-doesnt-believe-tony-abbott/

[Rebel*1*]

Smee, I don't think you can compare breast feeding in public, with copulation.  For a start, the latter is absolutely illegal and offensive  in a public place, and likely to get you arrested.  I don't consider breast feeding offensive, and by comparison, it's not illegal and you can't be arrested for it.

Breast feeding may be natural and wonderful - but that does not mean you can break the rules - you can fight to get them changed - and that is what she should have done.

MUM, things are not the same here as there.  Breastfeeding doesn't breach any rules of the NSW Parliament, and has been a perfectly acceptable practice since 2007.   Maybe we're more broad minded ? 

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Breastfeeding-okay-in-NSW-parliament/2007/10/17/1192300836750.html

Breastfeeding 'okay' in NSW parliament
October 17, 2007 - 3:04PM

NSW has created the nation's first breastfeeding-friendly state parliament by allowing mothers to nurse in both the upper and lower parliamentary chambers.  The NSW parliament is the first state parliament in Australia to provide all of these facilities, and the first to receive the ABA accreditation.

Meanwhile in WA it took public protests, negative media and opposition lobbying, and now, it also isn't against any rules in WA Parliament  either.   The controversy there, was with one female Pollie who introduced a Bill to include Breastfeeding in the WA anti discrimination Legislation.

At one point in 2009, Barnett insisted that there would be no need for a law if only women were “courteous” and “modest”? He was not a popular boy with a statement like that apparently.  LOL.

Realistically, the only thing it offends, is the delicate sensibilities of those who should just look the other way if they can't reconcile with it, or mind their own business. 

MUM, in WA last year there was one woman ejected from a restaurant just for asking if there was a private place where she could breastfeed.  That's now illegal.  Similarly, another woman in Bunbury was harassed by a fellow patron at a cafe for feeding her son under a blanket.  She explained that, they were waiting for lunch, it was too hot in the car to breastfeed in mid summer, and the cafe had no mother's room.  She refused to use the toilet so what other choice did she have?.   Nevertheless, that kind of busy body behaviour and passive aggressive harassment is also now illegal in WA. 

On 25/3/10, Amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act 1984 in WA now prohibit discrimination against mothers breast feeding in a public place, and for related purposes.

http://www.parliament.wa.gov.au/parliament/bills.nsf/BillProgressPopup?openForm&ParentUNID=03EB5BCDE8067839C82575B40014A66C

So all the sensitive conservative types will just have to learn to keep their opinions to themselves.  Women don't go out of their way to breastfeed in public.  It's usually a case of being caught on the run and having no other choice, or like the Bunbury lady, choosing not to feed her child in a hot car or a toilet.  Anyway, you see more bare breasts at the beach and I don't see too many blokes complaining about that.

[Rebel*1*]

Thanks MM, I got a giggle out of this line

We know that Phoney Tony has been receiving acting lessons but quite clearly his acting coach forgot to tell him how important it was to stay ‘in character’.

[*Ubbie Max*]

I just found out that the Shooters & Fishers party will give their preferences to the Libs. I've been thinking about joining Shooters & Fishers party as I'm a keen fisho & hate to see the random banning of recreational fishing in proclaimed areas.

Recreational fishos do no damage to the fish ecology, it's the commercial fishing industry that needs to be curbed.

[Rebel*1*]

True Ubbrd, but I doubt Tony Abbott will or even can do anything about recreational fishing.  He'll support commercial fishing though, because Money Talks.  But is it a Federal jurisdiction or a State one?  I thought it was administered by each State Govt, not Federal. And if that's the case, what relevance would the Federal Election have in changing or overriding those State laws? 

Nevertheless, Tony can't even figure out what is truth or dare according to the 7.30 report that M/Mum gave a link referring to: 

This was the key exchange:

Abbott: “Kerry, all of us when we are in the heat of verbal combat so to speak will sometimes say things that go a little bit further.”

O’Brien: “Mr Abbott, we are not all leaders of major political parties.”

Abbott: “Politicians are going to be judged on everything they say, but sometimes, in the heat of discussion, you go a little bit further than you would if it was an absolutely, uh, calm, considered, prepared, scripted remark. Which is one of the reasons why, the, the the statements that need to be taken absolutely, as, as gospel truth is those carefully prepared, scripted remarks.”

From another person's commentary it was highlighted that:

Abbott seemed to suggest later that O’Brien was merely dragging up maternity leave as an old issue. “This is an argument we could have had in March,” he said.

He then bristled when O’Brien suggested that the maternity leave example helped explain why Abbott was known in the party as “the weathervane”. Abbott said he didn’t think many people called him that. O’Brien then reminded Abbott of his claim at a meeting in a small Victorian town that climate change was “absolute crap”, even though he was saying on the national stage that something clearly had to be done about it.

O’Brien  pointed out that it all sounded a bit reminiscent of John Howard’s famous distinction between “core” and “non-core” promises

http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-curse-of-kerry-now-tony-has-a-7.30-meltdown/

[mandurahmum]

I dont know about you lot being more broadminded - I just dont think we had women in parliament that had babies whilst they were members.

After all - we did have the first female Premier in this country.

Ubbs - your right most of us recreational fishers aren't the problem - most of us now catch and release - or in my case dont catch at all

[*Yibida*]

I just found out that the Shooters & Fishers party will give their preferences to the Libs. I've been thinking about joining Shooters & Fishers party as I'm a keen fisho & hate to see the random banning of recreational fishing in proclaimed areas.

Recreational fishos do no damage to the fish ecology, it's the commercial fishing industry that needs to be curbed.

Ubb's I've been very active protecting our sport the last couple of weeks giving the who's who of politics heaps... I have an official guarantee that our fishing will not be touched... as long the current mob is in power that is.... if that changes then my work will start all over again........ Sigh ! { my identity has been chaged to protect the innocent... me }


Dear Mr Yibida

Thank you for your email to Minister Helper regarding the Victorian National Parks Association's recent call for more marine national parks. The Minister has asked that I respond to you on his behalf.

The Minister has indicated that the Brumby Government has rejected the Victorian National Parks Association's proposal to increase the number of marine parks in Victoria. A joint media release from the Minister for Agriculture and the Minister for Environment and Climate Change is attached below for your information. Click here to read it online.

Thank you for your interest in this matter.

Regards
____________________________________________________________________
Damian Thompson | Departmental Liaison Officer
Office of Joe Helper MP
Minister for Agriculture
Minister for Small Business
t +61 (0) 3 9658 4146    f +61 (0) 3 9658 4671  e damian.thompson@minstaff.vic.gov.au
§ Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.



 To joe.helper@parliament.vic.gov.au  
cc  
Subject Marine parks issue.

My email to him below....

To Mr Joe Helper

In regards to the proposed marine parks:

where is the data that backs up this theory that marine parks are necessary ? I am now over 50 years old and fished Port Phillip bay and the Victorian coastline all my life, as my father before me, I have not noticed any reduction in bread and butter common fish species, in some areas it has actually improved, it is a shame we do not have a Representative [voice] in the system to counter strike these false claims by the people spreading unfounded information, again where is the data to back up marine parks are needed ? and how many of these people pushing for marine parks enjoy these places ? how many people don the scuba gear every week
end and dive in these areas to enjoy the under sea forests ? NONE thats how many, and to add they would not know the difference between a flathead and a gummy, all our fish are migratory and only visit at certain times of the year, they don't live in marine parks, I see a bleak future for fisho's, boat manufacturers, tackle and bait shops, outboard engine manufacturers,charter operators, tourism,the list is endless, not to mention the unemployment that will occur from recreational fishing services effected, I say NO MORE, show us the proof or data or your arguments are flawed, I speak from years experience, I or thousands of others that have fished the bays all our lives have not been asked for our opinion, It's indeed a brave politician to push this issue, take heed politicians  721,000 Victorians went fishing in 2008-09, that’s an awful lot of voters.

Regards Yibida.  




My work is done.... for now...

[*Ubbie Max*]

Top stuff Yib. I'm concerned that the NSW govt will react & create new marine parks to make the Greens happy. The current NSW govt is on the skids & unless something dramatic occurs will probably lose the next election.

[Rebel*1*]

OK Ubbrd, now I get it.  MM's link explains what he's up to.    But I still don't think he can override State Govts all over Australia and all the many Environmental groups that exist Nation Wide. 

Further, There are parts of Australia that are already Marine Reserves for very good reason, and anyone suggesting that they should be thrown open would come up against HUGE opposition from one coastline to the other. 

Whilst  I sympathise with recreational fishing fanatics, in some places, it's not just Fishing that a marine reserve limits.  It also limits mining and at this point, the regions mum has been mentioning are two such places that need to be protected from Mining specifically to preserve the Environment along with the Fishing and Tourist industries.  I agree there has to be balance, but if it came to a choice, I'd choose to preserve Margaret River and the Kimberley coast as Marine Reserves, just to ensure the mining companies don't get to exploit them.

I have no doubt therefore why Abbott is trying to stop any future marine reserves being declared on the North West and South West WA coastlines in particular.    But it isn't about protecting commercial or recreational fishing.  Try Mining interests instead.  This is what was detailed in the link Mum posted.

The Federal Opposition has made a pitch to commercial and recreational fishermen promising to suspend the current process that decides what parts of Australia's coastlines should be given environmental protection.

In other words, he wants to head off any Marine reserves being declared in places that might limit his mining buddies from having access.

Speaking at a fish market in the central Queensland town of Mackay, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott promised that if the coalition won power it would suspend the marine bioregional planning process.

Mr Abbott also promised that the Fisheries Minister under a Coalition government would have equal say as the environment minister over what areas should be given protection.

"This is a very important issue right around Australia," Mr Abbott said. "Certainly this is an issue that is deeply troubling regional Australia and it is an issue that is deeply troubling people who enjoy fishing."

Mr Abbott also promised that under a Coalition government all future decisions on marine protected areas would be considered using peer reviewed scientific evidence that would be made available to all stakeholders, including local communities and fishing industries.

The North-West and South-West waters of WA was scheduled to fall under the draft plan with local environment groups pushing for a vast swathe of the Indian and Southern oceans to fall under the plan.

So when he says stakeholders, is he talking mining companies?  It's not surprising why he's onto this one, because no doubt the mining companies are already lobbying to get any possible restriction removed so they can mine the hell out of it.  He's just manipulating the fishing enthusiasts and commercial fishermen to give him support so he can bring them a nice big shiny Oil rig to kill off the fish altogether with the first mistake?   As MM said, it's deeper than the Gulf Rig and they can't fix that disaster can they? 

It's not hard to see what he's up to.  Sneaky barstard.  Cuddled up nice and snug with the Mining Industry as usual?   Nevertheless, he can say what he wants, I seriously doubt he'd get that kind of caper into legislation anyway.

[*Yibida*]

Top stuff Yib. I'm concerned that the NSW govt will react & create new marine parks to make the Greens happy. The current NSW govt is on the skids & unless something dramatic occurs will probably lose the next election.

Ubb's we have 13 marine parks as of now.... I have been leaked information from behind closed doors of a deal done that if the greens didn't oppose the dredging of Port phillip bay they could have all the marine parks they wanted .... the recreational fishers have caused a huge back lash hense the back flip by Brumby... don't get me wrong we are all for fish conservation... just not where they are placed... the data is impossible to get { I suspect there is none }  we old salts have not been consulted and we know where they should be placed....

[Rebel*1*]

I'd say the East Coast has more than anywhere else probably.  Currently only one per cent of WA waters are protected by marine sanctuaries.

[*Ubbie Max*]

Yeah Yib, I suspect the story is or will be the same in many other states.

I have no objection to areas being declared off limits to mining & commercial fishing as it is these industries that cause the damage. Most recreational fishos comply with the laws. We return undersize fish & stick to the bag limits, in fact, blokes like me return most legal size fish anyway. I only keep a feed for the family (a few fish) & then only sometimes..  

It is the commercial fishing industry bi-catch that causes a lot of damage ie undersize fish & non targeted species being caught in the nets. These fish are either already dead when the nets are brought in or die shortly afterward.

Overfishing is a big problem in the commercial fishing industry, look what happened to the Orange Roughy. The industry was warned but took no notice & the Orange Roughy is now scarce in NSW.

Incidently, contrary to what some would have the population believe, a fish mouth hooked will survive when returned to the water.

Rebel, I think your right. WA has a huge coastline & a smaller population the NSW hense, fewer recreational fishos per kilometer of coastline.

[*Yibida*]

The anti-fishing lobby has been at it for years....unfounded lies and propaganda... that's what they are all about... { they could do with a bath also }

[Rebel*1*]

I have no objection to areas being declared off limits to mining & commercial fishing as it is these industries that cause the damage.

You have to wonder why Pollies can't make that distinction though and as usual it's all or nothing.  btw, I'm not anti fishing, I'm anti mining and commercial fishing in places that are overtaxed or sensitive. = Commercial exploitation.  I have nothing against fishing and I happen to think that some of the state laws are ridiculous.   Luckily they don't affect me.

BTW I was being told recently that the State Govt are talking about relaxing abalone harvesting in some places for recreational divers.  LOL.  You'll love this.  They're allowed to have two.  Why?  Well, there are Million dollar contracts that dominate the abalone industry in most places and nobody else is allowed to touch them.  (I'm no expert on this I just heard about it).  

[*Ubbie Max*]

Rebel At the end of the day it's all about votes.
 
"Is it a good idea, yes, are there any votes in it for me, no, we won't do it then".

[mandurahmum]

I dont know much about the marine reserves over in the east - but over here most of the ones that are protected - needed to be protected.  Recreational fishing is a big thing over here, Lots of us have the sticker on our car - I fish and I vote.  Most of us stick to the bag limits and the speed limits in sheltered areas.

But only 1% of our coastline is a marine reserve - ningaloo is probably the biggest area and most of us are glad that is now protected. 

The two areas we want to protect will have little effect on most WA's - there are not a lot of people who live in the Kimberley per sq km.

I dont know that Margaret River is known for fishing - there is too much else to do and see.

I think that is why it is important to leave these decisions to the States - because we know our area better than someone in a different state.  Why should some Politician in Canberra get to say what happens over here - when they have probably never visited the place and seen it for themselves.  The states have more of a vested interest in getting it right.

[*r3830*]

Yib, I'm a foundation member of the NSW Shooters Party. This now includes fisherman, 4WD, Archery, Horse Riding and a number of other sporting disciplines. The formation of a party became important - or,  we would all lose our freedoms concerning our sporting activities. Monday was a good example - where a robbery went wrong and two people - the robber, and a bystander were shot. The robber died. The Greens, Ms Rhiannon's response - ban all semi automatic handguns! And, as always, the only people who are affected are the lawful ones. It's extremely doubtful that the robber was an upstanding citizen, using a licenced firearm to commit the crime........ but that matters not - particularly when the outcome serves some narrow minded party agenda!

[HellWest'nCrooked]

  If we all get it ..........why don't the politicians?  aren't they made of the same stuff  ie grey matter between the ears.?   I often wonder where they lose it on the way up, fairly close to the bottom rung I suggest.

[*r3830*]

Good to see you Westy.....

There was a time when we were allowed to pursue our interests. From memory, that was a minor thing called freedom. These days however - EVERYBODY has to be sooooo vigilant - or someone who does not like what you do with your time will have your options taken away from you. And they call that fair and reasonable! It is still a fact that you can do whatever you like - as long as its legal. Simple solution to that is to make things illegal, or a fall back = regulate things out of existence = reduce people's options.

[bnwt]

PM Julia Gillard's radio ratings in a downward spiral

Talkback callers on ABC's 720 in Perth, for instance, have been heavily favouring Abbott over Gillard.


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/pm-julia-gillards-radio-ratings-in-a-downward-spiral/story-fn59niix-1225897736082

[*Yibida*]

Yib, I'm a foundation member of the NSW Shooters Party. This now includes fisherman, 4WD, Archery, Horse Riding and a number of other sporting disciplines. The formation of a party became important - or,  we would all lose our freedoms concerning our sporting activities. Monday was a good example - where a robbery went wrong and two people - the robber, and a bystander were shot. The robber died. The Greens, Ms Rhiannon's response - ban all semi automatic handguns! And, as always, the only people who are affected are the lawful ones. It's extremely doubtful that the robber was an upstanding citizen, using a licenced firearm to commit the crime........ but that matters not - particularly when the outcome serves some narrow minded party agenda!

Hi Loco, these marine parks are not to sustain our fish stocks, they are there to appease the green vote.. fish in other states have different breeding cycles and locations but our fish in Port Phillip bay only enter our bay to spawn and then leave for the ocean, the window of opportunity is only a few short months, they spawn all over the bay constantly moving around dropping eggs.. not just in a designated "marine park" {can they read signs now ? - drop eggs here } if they were serious about protecting fish stocks they would have to close the bay completely to fishing from September to April whilst all fish species entering our bay spawn... Now that would make the whole community happy wouldn't it.. yep everyone is effected eh not just fisho's.. our southern coast line is not safely accessible unless you have a big seaworthy boat... hence the reason for everyone fishing inside the bay { and it's a huge bay } the data the greens said they have to support marine parks is non existent... we have been hit with size and catch limits over the years and supported this move happily.. but they are not content with this they want us off the water all together it would seem... the anti-fishing lobby is alive and well... we fisho's have been battling them for years.. the struggle between good and evil will continue in the future as it has in the past..   

[*smee*]

Sounds like something fishy was going on between Brumby and the greens

[*r3830*]

Good to see you Yib.... really hope you're recovering well!

I remember watching a show with Rex Hunt - about the fishermen and women of Port Phillip Bay. To see so many people - families and kids - enjoying themselves, in pretty close proximity to everyone else struck me as something pretty special. It's a beautiful area - and quite large as you say. I'd imagine there would be a huge backlash from the people there if the area was closed to them.

[*Yibida*]

WE need something along the lines of your NSW Shooters Party. That includes fisherman, 4WD, Archery, Horse Riding ect... our current Piscatorial representation is minimal to say the least...

[*r3830*]

The Shooters party has two representatives in the Senate here. That certainly does help a great deal.

[*r3830*]

Something for you to have a look at Yibs..... they do have Victorian developments on the agenda here. I wasn't aware of the name change!

Shooters and Fishers Party

http://www.shootersparty.org.au/

[*Ubbie Max*]

G'day Loco. I want to join the Shooters and Fishers Party. What's the procedure. The Federal party.

[Rebel*1*]

Yibida, MM is right in that regard re:  It should be a State Govt decision, based on community consensus.  I am not a fishing enthusiast on this coast, but when I lived in WA, it was a way of life and part of the fun.   I have no issue with recreational fishing.  I doubt too many would try to prevent that activity specifically if the facts were put forward.  I think more the case that the whole issue just got thrown together under the banner of 'environmental protection' or depleting fish stocks due to 'over fishing' by the commercial fishing industry.  

If you want to get those particular laws reviewed then any party representing recreational fishing enthusiasts, should be focusing on THAT specific issue alone.  i.e. Not trying to argue the actual marine preservation status itself, or giving support to Abbott to barstardise the current scheme.  Much better to be lobbying for exemptions for recreational fishing specifically, and leaving the Marine Reserves intact and safe from the major vandals.

Nobody is going to agree to putting sensitive Marine areas at risk just to appease fishing enthusiasts, if that also involves allowing Mining companies to have a free for all because of it.   Recreational fishing needs to be made distinct from commercial interests i.e. it's 'a different kettle of fish'.  lol

I for one would view it as rather selfish and short sighted of anyone to support Abbott on scrapping future Marine Reserves, just so they can preserve a sport?  I think you'd find that many other Australians share those views.  That's why we have Marine Reserves. LOL

I can appreciate that regulation in many recreational interests are making this century so anal it's ridiculous.  But the way to get this type of issue on the table is to differentiate it from Mining and Commercial Fishing.    Why not suggest that to the Fishing organisations instead of just throwing preferences to Abbott so he can open the door to his mining mates under false pretenses?

[*Yibida*]

Thursday, 22 July, 2010

BRUMBY GOVERNMENT RULES OUT MORE MARINE PARKS

The Brumby Labor Government has not accepted a proposal to increase the number of marine parks in Victoria, the Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Gavin Jennings, said today.

Mr Jennings said the proposal contained in a report by the independent Victorian National Parks Association would not be acted on by the Brumby Labor Government.

“The Brumby Labor Government has ruled out creating more marine parks and will not amend the current marine national parks before the election or during the next term of government. This is similar to the moratorium introduced recently in New South Wales,” Mr Jennings said.

“While independent groups like the Victorian National Parks Association are free to put forward their views, this is not a proposal that the Brumby Labor Government is entertaining.

“Victoria’s marine national parks were established in 2002 in consultation with all stakeholders to protect marine life in those designated areas. Victoria has a world class system of 13 marine national parks and 11 smaller marine sanctuaries, protecting 5.3 per cent of our coastal waters.

“Our Government established those marine national parks in consultation with all stakeholders to protect marine life in those designated areas – and we are not changing these arrangements.”

The Minister Responsible for Fisheries, Joe Helper, said it was deeply disappointing that the Liberal and National parties had sought to deceive anglers by politically hijacking the issue and misrepresenting the Victorian Government’s position on the report.

Mr Helper said the Brumby Labor Government had a strong track record supporting recreational fishing.

“We are investing heavily in recreational fishing and are not going to close down those opportunities all Victorians are now enjoying,” he said.

The Victorian Government has committed:
•   $13.5 million for an Enhanced Recreational Fishing Program which includes the target to increase fish stocks by 30 per cent;

•   $1.3 million to build a new native fish hatchery at Snobs Creek;

•   $5 million to buy back licences in the Western Zone Rock Lobster industry to ensure that particular fishery remained sustainable; and

•   $3.2 million to the Go Fishing in Victoria initiative to improve fishing infrastructure around the state and encourage Victorian families to go fishing.

“The Brumby Labor Government will continue to work with organisations such as the Futurefish Foundation, the Australian Trout Foundation, Native Fish Australia and the Victorian Recreational Fishing roundtable to grow participation in recreational fishing and deliver enhanced recreational fishing opportunities for all Victorians to enjoy,” Mr Helper said.




News Item Added July 17th 2010
 
VRFish, The Peak Recreational Fishing Body representing all recreational fishers in Victoria, today condemned a demand by the Victorian National Parks Association (VNPA) for the creation of 20 new marine parks along the Victorian coastline, and the report commissioned to justify this call.

The report titled Nature Conservation Review: Marine and Coastal Issues Paper places recreational fishing as the key threat to our marine biodiversity, on a par with global warming.

The VNPA are using the outcomes of an international congress1 to justify their demand to lock up another 20% of our coastline to recreational fishing through blindly committing us to yet another international agreement.



VRFish, The Peak Recreational Fishing Body representing all recreational fishers in
Victoria, welcomes the State Government's rejection of a plan by the Victorian
National Parks Association to lock recreational fishers out of Victorian coastal waters
and the subsequent government rule out of creating more marine parks.
"Recreational Fishers, Boaters and the Victorian coastal community in general will be
satisfied with this genuine response from the Brumby Government" said VRFish
Chair, Geoff Cramer.
"VRFish is working tirelessly on behalf of the Victorian recreational fishing community
to continually improve our recreation and sport. VRFish will continue to lead and
advocate on any threat to both recreational fishing and the marine environment".
"The support we have received to help us combat this new marine park proposal
showed us that we were not alone in our opposition, and that there are many
ordinary Victorians who believe that the locking out of recreational fishing from areas
is not the best way to protect our fantastic marine environment" Geoff said.
"VRFish would like to acknowledge the Brumby Labor Government's prompt
response to this issue and on behalf of Victoria's recreational fishers we would like to
make special mention of the many people involved in this campaign who contributed
through hard work for, and support of, the Victorian recreational fishing community".

[*r3830*]

Ubbie - I've just written to John Tingle to find out about the joining process. Will post a result here as soon as the info becomes available. The NEW website link is shown below. Just joined the forum on this by the way.


http://www.shootersandfishers.org.au/

[MrsFluffyDodgers]

Sorry Fishing people, good points, just had to say this and it had all moved on...

I don't think you can compare breast feeding in public, with copulation.  For a start, the latter is absolutely illegal and offensive  in a public place, and likely to get you arrested.  I don't consider breast feeding offensive, and by comparison, it's not illegal and you can't be arrested for it.

Breast feeding may be natural and wonderful - but that does not mean you can break the rules - you can fight to get them changed - and that is what she should have done.
MUM, things are not the same here as there.  Breastfeeding doesn't breach any rules of the NSW Parliament, and has been a perfectly acceptable practice since 2007.   Maybe we're more broad minded ?

Heellllooooo  there Miss Rebel.

I breastfeed my little Fluffy for 12 months and I found from experience that it was not acceptable to feed little ducklings, willy nilly in public.  Duck Dodgers and I had Plukka come and stay for a few days and I thought I would be OK to feed little Fluffy in the pond loungeroom whilst Plukka was there, but little Fluffy just messed around and came off and looked around at times, exposing my beautiful, bountiful bosoms (I hope Golden is listening) and well, surprisingly, Plukka was extremely embarrassed and actually asked me to refrain from exposing myself in that way as he couldn’t handle it.  Sooooo Plukka would leave the room if I had to feed or I would feed Fluffy in the pond nursery.

That aside, the workplace is not a place at any time for either human babies or ducklings.   Having a little one is a major life changing responsibility and the consequences of procreating is something to be carefully considered.   .

Whilst I tried not to be in people’s faces when feeding little Fluffy, there were occasions, I do admit, when I was out and had no choice but to feed her (dear little thing she was), but I would only do it because there was no other choice and would cover myself with a little blanky if I couldn’t find somewhere suitable.  Most shopping centres have several rooms set up to look after babies and mothers so most of the time there was no issue.

I would think it would be against the rules of Parliament to bring children in there.  Whatever would posses a woman to take her baby to work – and parliament at that – and set about publicly nurturing her child?  It was not the result of being forced into the position of feeding because there was nowhere else, like I occasionally found myself in.  It was a forced and contrived situation – unnatural.  In my humble and considered opinion, it would have been to make a point and an unnecessary one in those circumstances at that.  

[*r3830*]

I'm going blind I think Ubbie..... refer link below!


http://www.shootersandfishers.org.au/get-involved/default.aspx

[*r3830*]

I would think it would be against the rules of Parliament to bring children in there.  Whatever would posses a woman to take her baby to work – and parliament at that – and set about publicly nurturing her child?  It was not the result of being forced into the position of feeding because there was nowhere else, like I occasionally found myself in.  It was a forced and contrived situation – unnatural.  In my humble and considered opinion, it would have been to make a point and an unnecessary one in those circumstances at that. 

Good Morning MrsFluffyDodgers! Wonderful to see you here!

I remember that story well. I actually emailed the young lady concerned.... can't remember her name - but a Green member from South Aussie I think.

As I recall, she had to attend an important vote in the house. The bells were rung necessitating her being there. I remember that there was a large deal of criticism pointed at her - regarding the care of her daughter. (She did have a carer - but this person could not provide feeding.) It wasn't a first - as there was earlier precedent.... but it went along the lines that it was a deliberate attempt to exclude her from the vote.

I must be awfully out of date - because I can't see any problem, or embarrassment, or issue in general regarding a mother breastfeeding her baby. I do think it a wonderful and beautiful thing...... I don't consider it to be sexual in nature, nor aligned with copulation (which certainly would be an issue LOL... although, hearing about the actions of some of our politicians..... well....)

Parliament was always the realm of men. This is slowly changing, ever so slowly unfortunately. But, along with these changes - perhaps there could be a rethink of the existing rules and an  introduction of some gender specific rules, to accommodate and assist these changes.

[Rebel*1*]

In fact Yibida, why not take a good look at why Marine Reserve classification is applied and what affect that Fed. legislation has on similar State laws restricting fishing.   Are they different or aligned for instance?  Can Fed override State and vice versa?  Whoever has the most power, is the target of any lobbying.  

There would be reasons given State and Federal, to justify the recreational fishing restrictions, and the trick is to demonstrate that they are wrong by way of a reasoned argument.   Those sporting parties you are talking about should be doing just that on their own merit, not getting in bed with Abbott.

Assisting Abbott to overturn the entire Marine reserve classification scheme thinking it will make any difference to recreational fishing (and thereby advantaging only the mining interests) is a travesty.  

Hello Fluffy.  I agree with Loco.  'The Times They are a Changin' and I think that's a good thing.  No woman should be humiliated or ejected for breast feeding.  I'd stand up for any nursing mum being harassed over it.  Who wouldn't?

Various women I personally know, have returned to work shortly after having their child, in 'salaried professional positions', and on various occasions had to breast feed on the run.  (Modesty taken into account of course)   That's life.  

I believe they were really lucky to have had the type of jobs, and employers willing to enable them to do that in the absence of paid leave.    i.e the employers couldn't afford to have key personnel absent for too long, so they made provisions for that person in the workplace so they can be there and also be with their newborn child.

Not every woman has that luxury, and you're right, a majority can't very well take a newborn to work.  So this paid parental leave will help a lot of working mums no doubt.  Much better than a baby bonus isn't it?  I think that is totally off the wall.  

[shyer]

I'm going blind I think Ubbie..... refer link below!


http://www.shootersandfishers.org.au/get-involved/default.aspx

Thanks loco just joined voted for thm before but as the web page says these days it is a numbers game

[*r3830*]

Good afternoon Paul

Yes, it’s still me, slogging away in the background, but pretty much sidelined these days, to let the new boys do their damnedest.    Good to hear from you, and I trust all is well with you.

It’s all got a  bit complicated since we changed the  name and got the fancy website.     But in some ways, it’s simpler.

To join or renew you go to Australian Shooters and Fishers Party, and click the “Contact Us” box on the top banner.     That leads to a form where you enter your personal details, and when you scroll down, it offers you a number of options, including how to join or renew.

While it’s a bit harder to find, you can pay on line now with PayPal, or still use a credit card or a good old fashioned cheque if you prefer.

If you still have trouble, come back to me and I’ll try to help, although some technology is getting to be beyond me!

Cheers

John


GAWWWWD Mate - You're not on your own there!

Had an old email address. Wasn't sure whether it would still be in use or not. Well, it is, and JT is still as active as ever! That news has made my day!

[bnwt]

Sabotage. And there may be more to come ............... let's hope so


http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/sabotage-and-there-may-be-more-to-come-20100727-10uc0.html?autostart=1

[bnwt]

The hangover after Gillard's Labor party


http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/07/28/2966627.htm?site=thedrum

[Rebel*1*]

One of the few objective comments on that 'sabotage' link was this:

I feel that to have any real credibility or integrity and to back up his claims, Laurie Oakes should reveal who his informant is, that is, if they really do exist and Oakes is not just making up these stories to use as a weapon to attack Julia Gillard with.
I am not buying into these stories by Laurie Oakes simply because he hasn't offered or put forward any real proof as to whether they are authentic or not. and the only way that Laurie Oakes can do that is to reveal his source of information, otherwise his stories are baseless, worthless and not backed up by any real proof or evidence.

So, Firstly, and as Gillard said this morning, these are 'anonymous' allegations.  I agree that if this person exists, then they should step forward and add credibility to the allegations.  That is unless it's another Turnbull episode.  Guess they learned nothing about accusing people like the PM without credible evidence huh.

Now, let's deal with the proposition of an elected official breaching Cabinet Confidentiality, because clearly that rather OBVIOUS second point is being overlooked entirely in terms of the informants so called credibility.   Such an individual, if they exist, CAN'T be trusted and hence, can't be believed.  Their credibility is already shot because of their devious conduct.

The informant should step forward and take responsibility for these allegations and their complete lack of integrity and discretion.  True or not, it's not the point.  The fact that the informant breached Cabinet Confidentiality in the process is more the point.    Obviously the person who has leaked this information (if they exist), is perhaps more deserved of being BOOTED out of Politics for having no respect for Cabinet Confidentiality.  How the hell can the Pollies speak their mind if they have no confidence that what's said in the Cabinet stays in cabinet?  This whole thing stinks of Liberal toe cutting Abbott & Hockey style. 

The treatment of Cabinet ‘leaks’ and unauthorised disclosures

If a Commonwealth public servant discloses Cabinet material without authorisation, under current law they could be subject to criminal prosecution under s. 70 of the Crimes Act 1914.[63] Section 70, Disclosure of information by Commonwealth officers, is a general secrecy provision that the Commonwealth adapted from s. 86 of the Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld). 

If there is a real person behind these leaks, then I hope they are charged and sued for their immoral actions.  IN the meantime they should be resigning.

[wyzeguy60]

I am not buying into these stories by Laurie Oakes simply because he hasn't offered or put forward any real proof as to whether they are authentic or not. and the only way that Laurie Oakes can do that is to reveal his source of information, otherwise his stories are baseless, worthless and not backed up by any real proof or evidence.

oh is that so.

Have you got proof of the following statement or is your opinion gospel ???

" Why not suggest that to the Fishing organisations instead of just throwing preferences to Abbott so he can open the door to his mining mates under false pretenses? "

Oh and of course Labor wouldn't do the same would they for a few bucks. Oh of course not - they would just tax them out of existence - lol.