A victory for free speech

This entry was posted in Freedom of speech, Sink the Fink. Bookmark the permalink.

60 Responses to A victory for free speech

  1. C.L.

    Also see Chris Berg, The right to silence as an “over-reaction” to tyranny.

    I await the Daily Telegraph depicting Barry O’Farrell as Stalin.

  2. Samuel J

    A victory to be sure. But at a huge cost. First, the money used to draft the legislation and conduct consultation and the other parts associated with the development of the proposal. Then the cost to all of those involved in campaigning against a Bill that should never have even been contemplated. Then the reputational damage to Australia for proposing a law that would not seem out of place in Zimbabwe. Then the risk of a further encroachment on our freedoms with a somewhat lesser bill in the future having now softened the population up.

    The fact: this bill was a gross violation of Australia’s freedoms. Roxon et al should be condemned for treason for advocating such a path. Roxon et al are traitors just like Kim Philby etc. She misused her position and subverted our democracy. I hope she can look forward to a life in Bolgia 5 of the Eighth Circle of Hell where she is immersed in a lake of boiling pitch, guarded by devils.

  3. Steve of Glasshouse

    Sam..there you go..attacking the man. We all know these policies are brought forth by the stork; not the fault of the politicians who are blessed with ‘em. That’s how the PM continues to have full confidence in her team; it’s never their fault.

  4. Gab

    Dreyfuss didn’t say the legislation would be dropped forever, just that it needed reworking which is what his team is doing.

    Remain ever vigilant.

  5. duncanm

    Samuel,

    think of all the real damage they could have been doing if they weren’t busy screwing this up.

    On the plus side, I wouldn’t be surprised if their vote drops even more due to this little excursion.

  6. Tintarella di Luna

    Remain ever vigilant.

    With what it cost our diggers to defend our freedom vigilance for us today is a small price to pay.

    Tim Wilson, James Patterson, Chris Berg and Simon Breheny have done a mighty job on our freedom of speech.

    I did so enjoy seeing Tim Wilson give that Anne Summers apprentice Lisping Lizzie from the Human Rights Commission the bollocking she deserved.

  7. Tom

    I bought an IPA membership a few weeks ago for less than the price of a footy club membership. Best single outlay I’ve ever made – and I’m not being flippant. The creeping fascism of the left already controls the media, the judiciary, the bureaucracy and academia. It has to be rolled back or Australia will be an unrecognisable shithole in 10 years. Men and women didn’t die to defend the illiberal collectivism that is being forced upon us mostly by unelected drones who are trying to hijack the culture.

  8. Tintarella di Luna

    Renewed mine today Tom. Good investment, gave up my Wine Society membership for the cause.

  9. Tintarella di Luna

    Men and women didn’t die to defend the illiberal collectivism that is being forced upon us mostly by unelected drones who are trying to hijack the culture.

    And it’s the collective that gives me the creeps – especially the Emily’s List types. i can’t believe some of these women, their behaviour is simply alien to what the real trailblazers of Labor represented. People like first Senator Dorothy Tangney.

    I have a friend who is a very high-ranking public servant and close to the Union-Labor action. She is Labor to her boostraps and is disgusted and appalled at the misogyny rubbish. Furious that people would think that she’s attained her position simply because of her gender and not her ability.

  10. Andrew

    A victory for freedom…you have to acknowledge your victories.

  11. Rabz

    Congratulations, IPA – Been so impressed by your work I too joined up recently.

  12. Samuel J

    The IPA is a fantastic organisation. Congratulations to John and the team.

  13. Andrew

    Maybe if I get a job and earn some money, I could join the IPA. The values of the organisation resonate with a lot of people. People who are not loud lobbyists.

  14. Gab

    $88 membership, Andrew or $55 as subscriber. Maybe the IPA give student discounts. Ask them.

  15. val majkus

    I’m a member too and agree the IPA have done a fantastic job with its freedom watch campaign
    I put a couple of comments on another blog today so I’ll just copy them over
    Chris Berg’s testimony before the Senate Commission is now up http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;orderBy=customrank;page=0;query=Dataset%3AcomSen,estimate;rec=3;resCount=Default
    note these passages
    But I do not think it is appropriate for any government regulator or any government to try to impose on the free press its own conception of what constitutes fairness or balance. The free press has a vital and essential democratic role to basically expose the misdemeanours of government. The idea that the government would then turn around and regulate the press for fairness or balance seems to me to be deeply worrying and seriously concerning. It is extraordinary that we are talking about this in 2013.

    Mr Berg: I am not suggesting that it is a very good thing to equate people with paedophilia. I am not defending that claim. I am defending the claim that in a society that respects freedom of speech as a fundamental value we have to accept sometimes that offensive speech will be made. If you are only going to defend speech you agree with then you are not defending freedom of speech at all.

    good on you Chris!

    and

    But that nice Mr Finkelstein says the proposed new laws don’t really do anything. When asked by Senator Cameron if he felt that the proposed reform was undemocratic, that it would “destroy freedom of the press and will lead us to some authoritarian society where the minister can direct editorial content and the content of the media”, Mr Finkelstein was dismissive. “This bill does nothing towards ending democracy and it is a relatively minor imposition on press freedom and probably no restriction on free speech,” he said.
    see http://www.theaustralian.com.au/media/conroy-plan-modest-ray-finkelstein/story-e6frg996-1226601033249
    I suppose he would say that wouldn’t he? Remember Paul Howes ‘If one job is lost ….’
    If anyone wants to check out the news media bill read it here http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/download/legislation/bills/r4994_first-reps/toc_pdf/13057b01.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf
    the draconian sections are ss 7-10
    These sections create the office of Public Interest Media Advocate (PIMA). Paul Kelly in the Oz today http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/columnists/leaders-take-the-caucus-over-a-cliff/story-e6frg74x-1226601010835 says ‘There is no infrastructure to sustain its alleged independence, PIMA has sweeping statutory powers sufficient to cripple a newspaper, and with a vast statutory discretion governing the application of these powers.’
    As Paul Kelly says whatever happens to the bills now – the damage is done – ‘Cabinet and caucus have crossed the threshold to authorise new instruments of state power against the media. This is now a Labor value’
    Shame on those Labor MP’s who have so willingly fallen into line – free speech is worth defending but not it appears by Labor MP’s

  16. val majkus

    don’t worry comrades
    Gillard is passionately committed to free speech
    she says so

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73pmMSV-OaA

  17. Tom

    Andrew, in view of what the IPA actually does, as opposed to what the zombies at The Drum accuse it of, take note of the hysteria that comes up in the next six months whenever the initials are mentioned. The freedom fighters of the modern Australian left stand for the crushing of personal liberty, which their anti-government ancesters in the 1960s and 1970s fought pitched battles for.

  18. Tapdog

    My IPA membership continues to give me a lot of good feelings. Chris Berg, James Patterson, Simon Breheny, John Roskam give yourselves a pat in the back for your simple, powerful and ultimately successful advocacy.

    And well done that man for giving up his Wine Society membership.

  19. Tom

    well done that man for giving up his Wine Society membership.

    LOL.

  20. TerjeP

    Meanwhile why nobody was paying attention the NSW Liberal Party joined forces with the Shooters and Fishers Party to abolish the ancient English right to silence.

  21. Grant B

    OT – From the Drum on channel 24 as I write. David Marr now has conclusive proof of the Abbott punch. Someone was photocopying something and saw it and will come forward and say so. David is ecstatic.

    This is the first and hopefully the last time I have ever seen a man have an unassisted orgasm on national TV.

  22. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Tinta, what a shame the good name known as ‘Lizzie’ gets drawn into service as a descriptor of Ms. Broderick, who is clearly one of the bad Elizabeths, of whom there are quite a few. Broderick is not much of a Lizzie at all, in my opinion, lisping or not. Lizzies, so I believe anyway, have no time at all for Ms.Broderick and her ilk. We are rather particular about the company we keep.

    The IPA sounds like very good company to keep.

  23. WhaleHunt Fun

    Marr will not want his right to silence when he’s being racked by Press Inquisitor General Alan Jones after Jonesy is appointed by Abbott.

    It will be a gold plated mechanism that Jonesy will use.

    Marr will be racked by gilt.

  24. C.L.

    Meanwhile why nobody was paying attention the NSW Liberal Party joined forces with the Shooters and Fishers Party to abolish the ancient English right to silence.

    I was paying notice for weeks and months.

  25. Chris

    Meanwhile why nobody was paying attention the NSW Liberal Party joined forces with the Shooters and Fishers Party to abolish the ancient English right to silence.

    I don’t think its a good development, but the English lost that right a while back didn’t they? In fact the NSW law seems to follow what occurs in the UK now.

  26. dover_beach

    True. CL has been laying into Fatty O’Barrell for months on this specifically and for years generally. We even debated this issue here about a month or so back wherein some had no problem with the removal while others (I included) where generally dumbfounded that some libertarians saw no problem with it.

  27. Infidel Tiger

    I’m glad they’ve taken away our rights to shoot and fish. We obviously don’t deserve it judging by the political reps.

  28. Infidel Tiger

    I don’t think its a good development, but the English lost that right a while back didn’t they? In fact the NSW law seems to follow what occurs in the UK now.

    Britain is a full blown fascist toilet that should be left to the muzzies to rape and pillage. Emulating anything those gap toothed layabouts do is suicide.

  29. Tintarella di Luna

    Tinta, what a shame the good name known as ‘Lizzie’ gets drawn into service as a descriptor of Ms. Broderick,

    Popped in to say good night — ah but Elizabeth (Lizzie) B. Lizzie Broderick is an unbracketed (and at times unhinged) Lizzie and therefore in no way connected to the good Lizzies whose company she should keep.

    Buona notte.

  30. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Unbracketed and unhinged. Yep, she is that, Tinta, and I am well satisfied; those brackets are my ID bracelet. Sleep tight.

  31. Michael

    So, just a fund-raising pitch – give us money!!

  32. Mindfree

    And money well worth it Michael, who do you give yours to …Giddup?

  33. Ubique

    Joined IPA last year. And when I heard that Quadrant had had its funding cut to nothing by TLS took out a subscription there as well.

  34. Michael

    I’d give him money to stop waving his right arm around.

  35. This is the first and hopefully the last time I have ever seen a man have an unassisted orgasm on national TV.

    I thought he had one every time he swung his gaze on Kevin Rudd or Barack Obama.

  36. twostix

    I don’t think its a good development, but the English lost that right a while back didn’t they? In fact the NSW law seems to follow what occurs in the UK now.

    We’ve got a pom prime minister who’s a devout british socialist.
    A pommie 1960′s throwback union goon trying to regulate the media.
    A limey shop stewart hounding News Ltd as head of the senate hearings on the matter.
    And the PM’s office is run by a disgraced and exiled UK Labor spinner.

    And we’re busily implementing every single failed Blair era policy.

    Under Labor we’re more a colony than we were in 1970.

  37. wreckage

    The law FOB introduced was to allow a jury to be advised that they could draw a negative inference from a refusal to answer a question.

    Pointless at best, juries can already get miffed at silence, and dangerous at worst, and I really don’t see why the FAS rolled with O’Farrel on this.

  38. Jannie

    In the mediteeranean on board boat. internet access very iffy. But congrats to all catallaxians, i have been reading the debate as best as i can. especially JC and CL. Keep it up.

    will renew my IPA membership when i get home, and donate. great work.

  39. Jannie

    Hey its working, I posted! Must be the med or something.

    I meant congrats to all, espec JC and CL, but also Sinc and other article writers.

  40. Mike of Marion

    Jannie

    21 Mar 13 at 6:19 am

    OT – Stay away from Cyprus – they need the money!!!!

  41. Tintarella di Luna

    In the mediteeranean on board boat

    Where are you Jannie — off the Amalfi Coast somewhere I hope?

  42. Tintarella di Luna

    Beware the goings on and off Lampedusa.

  43. Ellen of Tasmania

    Congrats IPA – we’re members. If you want freedom you have to be prepared to pay twice in Australia. Once for the official rubbish (Human Rights, public education, health etc.) and again to get the real deal.

    Here in Tassie they want to prosecute you if you DON’T assist someone get an abortion.

    (see http://www.emilysvoice.com and good on them for the name choice.)

  44. Michael

    “intent on imposing it on the Australian people…..” – Paterson

    Yeah, the democratic govt, drafted a new law,opened an extesnive and lenghty consultion process, involving writtne submision, hearings an inquiry and debate, then reviewed all the material…and decied not to go ahead.

    How totalitarian!!!!!!!

    Grow up James.

  45. Bruce

    The “presumption of innocence” died decades ago in Australia.

    EVERY Firearms / Weapons Act in Australia EXPLICITLY reverses the onus of proof. This started back in the early 20th Century.

    See also the various “Drugs Misuse” Acts and the Immigration Act for a few more.

    The entire legal system in Australia is hurtling towards a “European-style”, “March in the guilty bastards” system, as opposed to the now-almost-extinct British “innocent until PROVEN guilty” approach.

  46. Driftforge

    Here in Tassie they want to prosecute you if you DON’T assist someone get an abortion.

    No confidence in the government. Upper house has stood us in good stead so far; doubt it will be different this time.

  47. Tintarella di Luna

    Once for the official rubbish (Human Rights, public education, health etc.) and again to get the real deal.

    Ellen the silence from the Yuman Rights Commission is deafening — that a publicly funded organisation such as the IPA has been at the forefront of the campaign against the totalitarians in residence in Canberra means that the Human Rights Commission must be disbanded and we’ll have to start again with another body — that’s going to be the only way to cut the legs our from under the Left’s march through the institutions.

  48. Tintarella di Luna

    No confidence in the government.

    With an Emily’s Lister as Premier lack of confidence is the expected certainty.

  49. Tom

    the democratic govt, drafted a new law,opened an extesnive and lenghty consultion process

    Hahahahahaha!!!

    Don’t you tell people to grow up, you fascist delinquent.

  50. Token

    Our newest lunar left troll “Michael” is back.

    Let’s see if he can post an entry relevant to the thread today.

  51. what planet am I on?

    $88 membership, Andrew or $55 as subscriber.

    1 years subscription to the ETU or 10 years to the IPA.

    Pity I have no choice.

  52. Michael

    Tom,

    Democratic govt suggesting a policy, inviting feedback and listening to that feedback before putting it to a vote in the Parliament – yeah that’s fascism.

    Nuttier than a sack of squirrels.

  53. wreckage

    AGREE IN ONE WEEK OR I TAKE MY BAT AND BALL AND GO HOME!

    I guess to some people that’s a consultative and inclusive process.

    People who will be losing the next Federal election by a wide margin, and everyone knows it.

    I really like the bit where dear ol’ Mick reckons we should give the Gillard government its due for presenting the legislation to Parliament. Boy, that was really considerate of them, wasn’t it?

  54. wreckage

    Minority government rushing a handful of bills to Parliament while every single stakeholder from drama writers through to media owners and every Parliamentarian who isn’t either ALP or Green loudly demands more time to read, understand and provide feedback on those bills?

    Is that what you meant, Michael? Because I think I can see some minor issues with how you spelled it.

  55. wreckage

    And the idiom is “nuttier than squirrel shit”. You can’t even swear right.

  56. Michael

    wreckage,

    You’re confused.

    This is about the anti-discrim legislation, not the media bills.

    Try again.

  57. Fisky

    Both have been shelved, doofus. A total capitulation by the Left.

  58. Michael

    Frisky,

    you guys need to make up your minds.

    Is it “total capitualtion” or “totaltairansim”???????

    They seem mutually exclusive.

  59. Token

    James Dellingpole notes an important point – this “victory” against the Conroy and the government censors has come at a cost – a beefed up press council chock full of lefties on the warpath:

    First, together with the Australian, I ended up being threatened with a nasty letter from one of the expensive metropolitan law firms you can afford when you’re subsidy-bloated corporatist vampire like the wind industry. Then I got reported to the Australian Press Council.

    Now which side, do you suppose, did the APC take in all this? Did it stick up for the rights of the crusading, independent press to take on the corrupt establishment bullies without fear or favour? Or did it, perhaps, use its powers to try to punish The Australian for having revealed an inconvenient truth?

    The latter, of course.

    One of the APC’s rulings concerned a quote which had been given to me by an Australian sheep farmer whose rural idyll was threatened by the wind industry. (Andrew Bolt is well worth reading on this – and on the way the Gillard administration is using the Press Council to muzzle the media)

    AS a NSW sheep farmer fighting tooth and nail to stop a wind farm development near his beloved home told me the other day in trenchant style: “The wind-farm business is bloody well near a paedophile ring.”

    “They’re f . . .king our families and knowingly doing so.”

    A pithy quote – and from what I’ve witnessed myself of the way the wind industry abuses ordinary people, a not inapposite one.

    Yet in the view of the Australian Press Council, this was worthy of censure. And what I’d very much like to know is: on what grounds?

    If the quote was inaccurate – or made-up – it might have point: clearly journalists have a duty to the truth. But the quote wasn’t made up, so that argument doesn’t cut it.

    OK, so what about the idea that the quote was offensive? W-e-ll, yes, if you’re involved in the wind farm scam then yes you would find it offensive. But so what? Surely, if the Australian Press Council is going to make the “offensiveness” charge meaningful then it needs to address the issue of fair comment. The article was abundant with material to suggest that the wind industry is every bit as noisome, perverted and despicable as that farmer’s quote suggested. So really, the APC’s only justification in censuring the deployment of that quote would be if it could demonstrate that the wind industry was whiter than white, wholly guiltless of any of the charges levelled against it in the article, and that therefore it had been grotesquely maligned. This, of course, the APC signally failed to do.

  60. Token

    James Dellingpole notes an important point – this “victory” against the Conroy and the government censors has come at a cost – a beefed up press council chock full of lefties on the warpath:

    First, together with the Australian, I ended up being threatened with a nasty letter from one of the expensive metropolitan law firms you can afford when you’re subsidy-bloated corporatist vampire like the wind industry. Then I got reported to the Australian Press Council.

    Now which side, do you suppose, did the APC take in all this? Did it stick up for the rights of the crusading, independent press to take on the corrupt establishment bullies without fear or favour? Or did it, perhaps, use its powers to try to punish The Australian for having revealed an inconvenient truth?

    The latter, of course.

    One of the APC’s rulings concerned a quote which had been given to me by an Australian sheep farmer whose rural idyll was threatened by the wind industry. (Andrew Bolt is well worth reading on this – and on the way the Gillard administration is using the Press Council to muzzle the media)

    AS a NSW sheep farmer fighting tooth and nail to stop a wind farm development near his beloved home told me the other day in trenchant style: “The wind-farm business is bloody well near a p**doph*le ring.”

    “They’re f . . .king our families and knowingly doing so.”

    A pithy quote – and from what I’ve witnessed myself of the way the wind industry abuses ordinary people, a not inapposite one.

    Yet in the view of the Australian Press Council, this was worthy of censure. And what I’d very much like to know is: on what grounds?

    If the quote was inaccurate – or made-up – it might have point: clearly journalists have a duty to the truth. But the quote wasn’t made up, so that argument doesn’t cut it.

    OK, so what about the idea that the quote was offensive? W-e-ll, yes, if you’re involved in the wind farm scam then yes you would find it offensive. But so what? Surely, if the Australian Press Council is going to make the “offensiveness” charge meaningful then it needs to address the issue of fair comment. The article was abundant with material to suggest that the wind industry is every bit as noisome, perverted and despicable as that farmer’s quote suggested. So really, the APC’s only justification in censuring the deployment of that quote would be if it could demonstrate that the wind industry was whiter than white, wholly guiltless of any of the charges levelled against it in the article, and that therefore it had been grotesquely maligned. This, of course, the APC signally failed to do.

Comments are closed.