Showing posts with label GetUp. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GetUp. Show all posts

Friday, June 22, 2012

Australian media: what a week


This week has been a momentous one in Australian news media. The two largest print media corporations (Murdoch's News Ltd and Fairfax) have both announced major restructuring leading to more than 3,000 job losses. Furthermore, the world's richest woman and Australian mining magnate Gina Rinehart has announced her intention to take a controlling share of the beleaguered Fairfax. Rinehart has made it clear that her goal is not profit, nor public service but influence, and she intends to exert editorial control, refusing to sign the Fairfax Media Charter of editorial independence. The implications of these changes are wide ranging and yet the precise shape remains uncertain. Rinehart is a noted climate dissenter and fierce opponent of the government's superprofits mining tax. I am no particular fan of Fairfax media, but am not feeling very confident that it will improve under Rinehart. Indeed, if I look at the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) pieces I've linked to over the last few years, I wonder how many would have made the cut under Rinehart's hand. Perhaps we may have little difficulty anticipating more voices like Andrew Bolt and his serial disinformation. It will be interesting to see whether those like Elizabeth Farrelly or Ross Gittins remain.

The week's events have only made me feel more favourably towards The Conversation (which I introduced back here), a not for profit news media site set up by CSIRO and five universities (with a few other corporate partners) that runs ad-free, is editorially independent and with nearly all contributions by accredited experts in the subject who have to declare all potential conflicts of interest next to their article. And just today I've realised that they also publish all their material under a Creative Commons license, meaning it can be republished for free (under certain very non-onerous conditions).

Here are some perspectives on these developments that appeared this week at The Conversation:

Malcolm Fraser: Does it matter who owns our papers? Yes it does.
Malcolm Fraser was Australian Prime Minister between 1975 and 1983 for the more conservative of Australia's two main parties.

Stephan Lewandowsky: Rinehart’s tilt at power is bad news for public debate.

David McKnight: Gina Rinehart and Rupert Murdoch: a study of power in the media.

Andrew Jaspar: Fairfax or Gina-fax? Let’s have the debate before it’s over and Media earthquake: panic, disinformation, and competing visions at Fairfax and News.
UPDATE: GetUp are running a simple survey on public attitudes towards Fairfax, which will take less than 60 seconds.

Wednesday, May 25, 2011

Polluters ought to pay

If you don't have a problem with the widely-accepted economic principle that polluters ought to pay for what would otherwise be an externality and want to show your support for (far from perfect) initiatives that begin to acknowledge that Australia is, per capita, amongst the worst offenders and ought to try to at least shuffle a few steps forward, then on 5th June you can join a series of rallies across the country organised by three organisations with a combined membership of over three million in order to say that the ones who cause a problem ought to bear the cost of it, rather than those least able to afford it and least responsible for the mess in the first place. The next few weeks are a critical period during which the details of Australia's climate policy will be negotiated between the Government, the Greens and the Independents. Public support for ambitious targets and affirming the principle of making polluters pay could help to nudge things towards a better outcome.

It's probably not going to save the polar bears. It won't fix the past. It's not going to change the world (though nor will current proposals break the bank, let alone cost the earth). But it is irresponsible to keep sticking our heads in the sand.

There will be a rallies in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth, Hobart, Adelaide and Brisbane. These rallies will be family friendly and are not just for hard-core activists, but for anyone with a mother who taught you to clean up your own mess.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Blow up the Pokies

Half the world's poker machines are located in Australia, and they rake in AUD$12 billion each year (that's not how much is gambled, but how much is lost by gamblers). Problem gamblers can throw away $1,000 per hour. GetUp are working together with Independent MP Andrew Wilkie to push for reform. The goal: mandatory pre-commitment, which simply means that players, before they start gambling, must set their own daily limit on how much they are willing to lose for the day. This isn't a massive change. Nonetheless, Clubs Australia are preparing to spend $20 million to fight the move and protect their bloated profits. You can sign a petition here (and another here)* to offer your support.

It isn't blowing up the pokies, but it's a start.
*H/T Arthur.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

NSW Election: Don't waste your vote


A short and fun little video reminding us of the differences between state and federal elections. Key message: if you vote above the line in the upper house, don't stop with a "1", or your vote may well expire (even if you vote for a major party and they don't need your vote due to the complex mathematics of the Single Transferrable Vote method), allowing extreme candidates such a Pauline Hanson or the Shooters Party to be elected (and possibly gain the balance of power), even if they only gain 1-2% of the vote. The lower house result may be the most obvious in the history of Australian elections (bookies are offering odds of 1:1.01 for a Coalition victory: for every dollar you bet, if the Coalition wins, they'll give you a whole cent!), but the upper house is wide open. Vote wisely and don't waste your vote.

Remember, vote for others.

Thursday, December 09, 2010

Stand with WikiLeaks (again)

As I suspected and hoped, GetUp have also now launched their own WikiLeaks campaign to print the following letter in full page ads in the Washington Post and New York Times with as many signatures as possible:

Dear President Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder:

We, as Australians, condemn calls for violence, including assassination, against Australian citizen and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, or for him to be labeled a terrorist, enemy combatant or be treated outside the ordinary course of justice in any way.

As Thomas Jefferson said, "information is the currency of democracy." Publishing leaked information in collaboration with major news outlets, as Wikileaks and Mr. Assange have done, is not a terrorist act.

Australia and the United States are the strongest of allies. Our soldiers serve side by side and we’ve experienced, and condemned, the consequences of terrorism together. To label Wikileaks a terrorist organisation is an insult to those Australians and Americans who have lost their lives to acts of terrorism and to terrorist forces.

If Wikileaks or their staff have broken international or national laws, let that case be heard in a just and fair court of law. At the moment, no such charges have been brought.

We are writing as Australians to say what our Government should have: all Australian citizens deserve to be free from persecution, threats of violence and detention without charge, especially from our friend and ally, the United States.

We call upon you to stand up for our shared democratic principles of the presumption of innocence and freedom of information.
You can add your signature here.

It may have been more strategic to have directed this campaign within Australia at the prime minister and attorney general, though perhaps they felt this had already been done. Then again, this campaign is somewhat similar to one by their sister organisation Avaaz.

UPDATE: It appears that this campaign is doing very well. Indeed, it seems like it might be the largest and fastest fundraising campaign GetUp have ever run, so they are (happily) extending it to publishing a similar message in the Australian (modified to be relevant of course). GetUp are also attracting some attention in the US, where the media have got wind of the ad and are running stories on it ahead of time.

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

GetUp Campaign Ideas

Helping to set the national agenda
GetUp members have the opportunity to help set the direction of upcoming GetUp campaigns through this page. You have ten votes to distribute and can allocate up to three of them for any one campaign idea (or suggest a new one). Ideas near the top of the list are more likely to be put into effect. So vote for things that matter and enlist the support of up to 400,000 Australian GetUp members to put or keep the issue on the national agenda.

I gave my votes to:
• Clean Energy
• Yes to Carbon Tax
• Transition Towns positive response to Climate Change and Peak Oil
• Wikileaks - urging the Australian Govt. to not bow to US pressure to criminalise the organisation.
I'm quite willing to be persuaded to reallocate them if someone wants to point out a campaign I might have missed (I didn't look at all of them closely).

One of the effects of this system is to give greater weight to issues that have been around for a while and have had a chance to gather votes. When an issue arises at short notice (such as WikiLeaks), it is at a disadvantage. I assume that this tool is not the only factor in the decisions of the GetUp campaign team.

I'm not a fan of quite a few of the suggestions. Unfortunately, it is not possible to vote down ideas that you don't like, only to reduce their chance of becoming a campaign by voting for alternatives. Of course, all GetUp campaigns are opt-in for GetUp members, so if you don't agree, don't participate (and you can also write to them to give more feedback, as I have done a number of times).

Thursday, September 23, 2010

Citizens vs the banks

Over the last few days, more than one hundred and fifty thousand Australians have joined the largest class actions in the nation's history against most of the major Australian banks. The first case against against ANZ has been announced and many more will follow. The issue concerns penalty fees, which have allegedly been illegally imposed at punitive rates rather than simply covering the banks' costs. The class action is being brought by Maurice Blackburn Lawyers, and funded by IMF, and managed by Financial Redress. GetUp have joined with Choice consumer group and the Australia Institute in supporting the action. It will be a very interesting test case.

If you are an Australian citizen, have been penalised by a bank for a relatively minor action at some point since 2004 and would like to join the action to gain a refund and hold the banks accountable, you can do so here.

Wednesday, August 18, 2010

Some myths about refugees in Australia


Voiced by an old EUer.

Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Get Up: wins and losses in the Australian political landscape


I've written before about the Australian independent political lobby group GetUp, which, with 370,000 members, is probably the largest grassroots political action group in the country. My wife helped to run the GetUp office for a few years and so I have some grasp of the breadth of work they do and the wide variety of issues they have successfully (and unsuccessfully) campaigned on. On the whole, I think they frequently do good work trying to change the wind of social conscience and discourse as well as faciliating real steps that strengthen the political process and outcomes. A good example of the latter was the recent High Court victory that enabled 100,000 voters to register who would have otherwise been excluded by an unconstitutional change to electoral regulations introduced by the Howard Government prior to the 2007 election (see first video). Whomever these 100,000 people may vote for, having such a large body excluded from the election process unnecessarily breeds frustration, cynicism and apathy.

However, sometimes GetUp campaigns don't hit the mark. Despite being their most heavily supported campaign yet (in terms of donations to put the ad on the air), their latest effort doesn't raise the bar of political discourse, is personality-driven and is too partisan. I have written to them saying as much. Go and watch the ad and if you feel the same, then you can do likewise here.

Friday, July 09, 2010

Coming soon to a ballot box near you


GetUp are at it again.

Don't forget to enrol. I'm just going to print off my application form for overseas registration now.

Tuesday, July 22, 2008

End mandatory detention

You may not realise this but there are still hundreds of people in immigration detention across Australia. Although conditions have improved somewhat from the nadir of a few years ago, many of the policies of the Howard era are still in force.

Finally, however, the Government is ready to listen and has launched a genuine Inquiry into detention. This is a great chance to call for a more humane system and thus give the Government a strong mandate for change. Chances like this don't come very often - to end a regrettable chapter of Australian history that caused unimaginable suffering to some of the world's most desperate and downtrodden.

It seems that this Inquiry signals that the Government genuinely wants to put an end to Australia's inhumane detention regime, and for the first time they are asking for our views. If ever you have despaired at the treatment of asylum seekers, put your name to GetUp's petition submission and help end this ongoing national shame. The inquiry closes at the end of this week so be quick.
Adapted from a recent campaign email from GetUp. GetUp's position on detention is as follows:

GetUp recognises that there has been a number of positive changes in detention policy in recent years, but we believe that there is still a long way to go before the policy will be acceptable to the community.

GetUp, along with a number of other refugee advocacy organisations, believes that Immigration detention should meet the following principles (revised 22 July 2008):
  1. Immigration detention should not be mandatory. It should be used as a measure of last resort for all people, not just children. It should be used only for legitimate necessary purposes: for health, character, identity and security checks, or where there is a proven ongoing security need.
  2. Immigration detention should have clear time limits, with public and legal scrutiny and detained people must have the ability to challenge that detention.
  3. Immigration detention should have all the ordinary standards expected by the rule of law, with a framework governed by legal rules, not by discretion.
  4. Immigration detention should be conducted with every step taken to ensure that a person in detention can access all necessary legal and welfare services and to ensure that every detainee can properly realise their right to legal advice.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

The future is expensive

Following the success of their Climate Clever-er campaign last year, GetUp are hoping to soon run this ad on prime time TV (to make it happen, donate here).*

Both ads use humour to make their point; in both cases the government's proposed solutions are ludicrously inadequate when compared with the magnitude of the issue. High petrol prices are here to stay. There's no point cutting excise, whether by 5c or 10c, nor will knowing tomorrow's high price make it more affordable. We need to change our assumptions and behaviour, to discover that life does not consist in the abundance of possessions.
*Notice that GetUp are criticising Kevin and the ALP (not for the first time!). This is no Labor front.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Six simple ideas towards reconciliation

Tonight we had a follow-up meeting after the GetUp GetTogether for reconciliation a couple of weeks ago. Jason, an indigenous artist who participated in the first gathering, invited us to the Boomalli Art Gallery in Leichhardt for tonight's discussion. We brainstormed ideas of small practical steps we could each take to help move towards reconciliation in our local area and in Australia. Here were some of the group's ideas:

• Be willing to take risks and be thick-skinned and patient enough to keep trying if and when there is misunderstanding;
• Write letters to the paper and to politicians to keep reconciliation on the local and national agenda;
• Say "hello" and show basic respect when passing strangers on the street;
• Share positive stories and challenge negative stereotypes when they are expressed;
• Volunteer with a local organization working towards reconciliation;
• Start a conversation with your friends and family: "what does reconciliation mean for you?"
I may have missed some of the ideas we discussed because I only started taking notes towards the end. Does anyone have further suggestions? Remember: from little things, big things grow.

Wednesday, April 30, 2008

GetTogether for reconciliation

Last night Jessica and I hosted a GetUp GetTogether for reconciliation in our flat. Thirteen people from the local community (only two of whom we'd met before) came along to hear each other's experiences and think about reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australia, especially as it relates to our local area. This gathering was one of around 350 across the country (see image for locations) organised by GetUp under the theme "From little things, big things grow".*

Quite apart from the content of the discussion (which was surprisingly high quality, given that most of us didn't know each other), I found the evening a fascinating exercise in community building. Again, I was struck by how hospitality is a key part of planting trust. I think it is rare for Sydneysiders (not sure whether this is true of urban Westerners more generally) to have strangers into their home. Sharing our spaces is part of sharing our lives.

Speaking of which, one of the Indigenous Australians who came along invited us all to a follow up event to be held at his local art gallery.

New single released
*From little things, big things grow is also the title of a new single released last week by GetUp in partnership with Paul Kelly, Missy Higgins and many more (and featuring Kevin Rudd). It debuted last week at #4 and you can spend $1.69 to buy it and help it get to #1. You might be able to guess that the idea was partially inspired by "Yes we can". All the lyrics come from Kevin Rudd's apology to the Stolen Generations and responses made on the day by Indigenous Australians (plus a little at the end from Paul Keating's famous 1992 Redfern speech).
Before someone tries to score points for saying there are only twelve people in the photo, one member of the group had to leave early.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

Environmentalism will ruin our economy

I agree with Colin Power. All this talk of renewable energy is a disgrace when there is so much coal left to burn.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Confused about the apology?

This Wednesday, Kevin Rudd, the Australian Prime Minister, will apologise to the "Stolen Generations" on behalf of the Australian parliament for policies implemented until the 1970s in which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians were forcibly removed from their families and placed into institutional or foster-family care simply on the basis of race. This has been a controversial and highly politicised issue in Australia for many years. As a result, there is much confusion over what the apology will and will not mean. Although the specific wording to be used will not be released until tomorrow, it is worth addressing some of the common questions about this event.

#1 I didn't do it, why should I apologise?
The apology on Wednesday is being made by Kevin Rudd on behalf of the Australian parliament, not the Australian people. The apology is for specific government policies relating to the removal of children, not generally for all mistreatment of indigenous people. As a parallel example, a few years ago John Howard apologised to Vietnam veterans for how they were mistreated upon their return from the war.

#2 Why bring up ancient history?
Not only do such traumatic actions have repercussions extending beyond a single generation, but these policies were still being implemented into the 1960s and early 70s. Many of those directly affected as children and family members are still alive today.

#3 Saying sorry won't change anything
An apology is a necessary but not sufficient step in the path to healing and reconciliation. In this case, it ought not to be a distraction from or alternative to seeking better results in health, education and housing. It will not change what happened in the past, but it is the only way to seek a better future.

#4 The policies were executed with good intentions
Intentions are not irrelevant, but by themselves are insufficient when evaluating an event. The majority of indigenous children were removed from their families purely on the basis of the colour of their skin, not the level of their care. Many were abused physically, sexually or emotionally as a result. It is difficult to find a member of the Stolen Generations who is happy about being denied the love of their parents and extended family.
Modified from The Stolen Generations’ Apology – 7 Handy Mythbusters published by GetUp.

If you want to watch the apology on Wednesday, here is a list of locations. It will be screened live on ABC at 9 am EST. Here are some FAQs answered by Reconciliation Australia. I also gave some more recommended links on the topic back here.

Wednesday, January 30, 2008

Saying Sorry

Yesterday it was announced first act of the new Australian parliament on 13th February will be to say "sorry" to the stolen generation.* Our previous government was willing to express regret, but refused to apologise for the sins of a previous generation, despite the recommendations of the 1997 Bringing Them Home report from the Human Rights & Equal Opportunities Commission.

This continues to be a divisive issue in Australia. I found this short paper of the Social Issues Briefing to be the most helpful short item I have read on the topic. It argues that the logic behind such an apology is deeply Christian. If you would like more information about the apology and what it will mean, Reconciliation Australia has published this FAQ document.

Rory suggests that the apology ought to be made by the Governor General as head of state, in order to lift it above party politics. Jason offers some more theological reflections upon forgiveness and saying sorry, as well as some relevant book reviews. GetUp has a campaign encouraging this action to be bipartisan and more than token.

Does anyone have other ideas on how to mark the significance of this step?
*(from Wikipedia): "The Stolen Generation (or Stolen Generations) is a term used to describe the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, usually of mixed descent who were removed from their families by Australian government agencies and church missions, under various state acts of parliament, denying the rights of parents and making all Aboriginal children wards of the state, between approximately 1869 and (officially) 1969."

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

How should I vote?

In ten days, Australians over the age of 18 have to vote in a federal election. If you're confused, curious, or simply looking to confirm your views, check out this excellent new website, freshly launched a couple of hours ago. It's called HowShouldIVote.com.au and in about three minutes it can tell you how to order your preferences for the House of Representatives (Lower House). Just enter your postcode and answer twenty multiple-choice questions about your attitudes to a variety of issues, and this website will match you to the responses from your local candidates. Easy!*

The website is run by GetUp, an independent, not for profit group, who lobby all sides of parliament on particular issues (you can see their FAQ page here), and the questions have been endorsed by one of Australia's leading pollsters.

Of course, what the website doesn't do is tell you how to vote in the Senate. My suggestion is to watch this little video:

Did you know that while the Coalition have held a majority in the Senate, they have passed 100% of their own amendments and blocked 98% suggested by other parties? They have passed complex 500-page legislation within a day of its being tabled and have reduced the hours during which the Senate sits. If you think the Senate ought to be a genuine house of review, perhaps it would be a good idea to avoid having the same party control both Houses. NB It is basically impossible for the ALP to gain a majority in the Senate this election due to their poor showing in 2004 (only half the Senate seats are up for election every three years).
*In some electorates, only a few candidates have completed the survey. If this is the case for you, please return in a couple of days and try again.