In weekly anti-Morrison column, Tingle condemns politicking

In the face of a bushfire catastrophe, our national conversation is still run by politics.

This entry was posted in Media, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to In weekly anti-Morrison column, Tingle condemns politicking

  1. stackja

    L still getting a Tingle.

  2. KaaBee

    Just another opinion piece and really, who is interested in
    Tingle’s opinion?

  3. Roger

    In the face of a bushfire catastrophe, our national conversation is still run by politics.

    Says a journalist whose every working moment is consumed by politics.

  4. John64

    La Tingle, surely, is taking the pi5s here.

    Have a read of what happened when the Prime Minister gave ABC News Radio some of his valuable time on 4th January – at the absolute height of the bushfire emergency – and the ABC “interviewer” Sandy Aloisi wanted to do nothing other than harangue him about the politics:

    Whip Me, ABC, Thrash Me Again

  5. The BigBlueCat

    It’s hard not to listen to these interviews though, and get the sense that he is rattling off an alibi; that he remains on the defensive.

    When being attacked, surely the PM must defend. Or is tingle suggesting he should just stand there and take a beating?

    The tenor of Tingle’s article is a political hatchet job – something her headline decries but does so none-the-less.

    Excuse the cynicism, but doesn’t a possible royal commission — whatever its ultimate virtues — provide the perfect response in the short term for any question you don’t want to answer?

    No, your cynicism is inexcusable. Having a royal commission after events like this should be mandatory, not “the perfect response in the short term for any question you don’t want to answer”. If it turns out that states have not acted on recommendations of previous bushfire RC’s, then those in charge need to be held accountable, whatever their political stripe.

    Questions of culpability need to be asked and answered. But I get it that those in authority at the state level don’t want those questions asked – it might explain certain responses relating to hazard reductions made by certain people. Those responses need to be tested.

    Yet even in the face of a catastrophe that shows our infrastructure vulnerable, and the economy under threat, we are still overwhelmed with political management.

    That’s because, Laura, organisations like the ABC have been at the forefront of attacking Morrison rather than looking for opportunities to get behind him. Laura, go see a shrink; you are suffering from Morrison Derangement Syndrome.

  6. The BigBlueCat

    But it apparently isn’t OK to simply say that clearly the climate has changed (even to say that without saying because it’s due to, you know, climate change).

    “Climate change” is leftist-speak for anthropogenic climate change (previously anthropogenic global warming, or AGW). Even Craig Kelly is adamant that the climate is changing – the issue is whether or not it is human-induced, and if so whether Australia (on its own) can actually do anything about it. Cutting our CO2 emissions does nothing for Australia (other than cost a lot of money and gives us unreliable electricity via renewables like solar and wind).

    It seems that there are seasonal forcings at work producing conditions conducing to severe bushfires (the Indian Ocean Dipole comes to mind, along with the impending Grand Solar Minimum.

  7. Cui Bono

    Savva and her weekly Abbott bad rants. Tingle and her weekly ScoMo bad rants. Cushy

  8. candy

    It is probably time for the Libs to give in to the pressure and re-instate the carbon tax, subsidise and build more renewable energy farms, amd close down the coal mines. It seems internationally we are a laughing stock if it was not so serious. Now I think that will half destroy Australia’s economy and there will still be bushfires, but I believe I am in the minority well and truly now. A dinosaur I am.
    Tough for kids and their future prospects and all that but you learn best through error.

    The media here makes things ungovernable too. It would be understabable if LNP want to give in to the pressure and just roll with it.

  9. Roger

    Tingle’s obsession with Morrison is “bizarre”.

  10. Rob

    It’s time to ensure that the ABC is 100% powered by solar and wind 24/7 or is that 2-4 hours/7?

  11. min

    Apparently Swedish voters are not pleased with the waste of money to reduce emissions as although millions have been spent their emissions are still going up

  12. Wil

    Now we know that Ita is in the same activist camp as Tingle, there is no stopping the ABC from heading the anti government brigade.
    Pity they don’t accept that most quiet Australians think the ABC is an irrelevant left wing pressure group running their own agenda to bring down the government.
    This really has nothing to do with fires, climate or whatever. They are only vehicles to get their points across. So if the fires go out, climate change stops tomorrow, it will not change the ABC anti Australian campaign.

  13. Boambee John

    I suspect that La Tingle defines “politicking” as expressing opinions with which she disagrees!

  14. John A

    The BigBlueCat #3289954, posted on January 12, 2020, at 10:47 am

    It’s hard not to listen to these interviews though, and get the sense that he is rattling off an alibi; that he remains on the defensive.

    When being attacked, surely the PM must defend. Or is tingle suggesting he should just stand there and take a beating?

    Now, how would Sir Humphrey Appleby express the idea of “get knotted, you bogan!”? Maybe starting with “Fake media” and “unicorn strategy”?

  15. Frank

    I suspect that La Tingle defines “politicking” as expressing opinions with which she disagrees!

    Even better, views that her husband disagrees with.

  16. Beachcomber

    Not only does the ABC encourage and enable Tingle’s partisan political agitprop, but taxpayers are also forced to pay her a salary so generous that most of us could only dream about it.

  17. Muddy

    Wil
    #3290054, posted on January 12, 2020 at 12:12 pm

    …if the fires go out, climate change stops tomorrow, it will not change the ABC anti Australian campaign. [My bolding].

    Yes. Absolutely yes.
    I’ve mentioned numerous times previously, that it must become political poison to support theirABC.
    What we need is a politician or political party with testicular fortitude, to intelligently (and repeatedly, with variations) publicly position theirABC as anti-Australian. TheirABC needs to be put on the defensive, so that eventually, politicians will hesitate to publicly support an entity that is becoming known as anti-Australian.

    It won’t be an easy job, but there is ammunition available if people in advantageous positions choose to become combatants.

  18. Colonel Crispin Berka

    The cross-fertilisation between JoNova’s site and the Cat continues, now with chortle-inducing advice to Greta and Co.

    https://www.youtube.com/embed/aIG9ozEDPVg

  19. Professor Fred Lenin

    You people dont understand If we close all coal fired power stations tomorrow there will never be a bushfire again Its simple . We can be an example for the rest of the world to ignore , Australia will show them .
    It will make it easier for China to move in and take over to protect their coal and ore supplies and maintain cheap power to their people . As there will be no coal burned in Australia there will be no bushfires to endanger of coal and ore supplies to China .

  20. H B Bear

    La Tingle,Pwobyn. Has the ALPBC political coverage ever been worse?

    Currently listening to ALPBCRadio interviewing Van Badham on bushfire “facts”.LOL

  21. Shy Ted

    And what does she do for the other 39 hours and 55 minutes of the working week?

  22. Viva

    “Climate change” is leftist-speak for anthropogenic climate change (previously anthropogenic global warming, or AGW). Even Craig Kelly is adamant that the climate is changing – the issue is whether or not it is human-induced, and if so whether Australia (on its own) can actually do anything about it.

    Instead of “climate change” with the implications attached to that term we should be more accurately talking about “climate variability”.

  23. iamok

    I do not read newspapers, I do not listen to news radio, I do not watch any form of news on TV. There is no point. “News” today is based on 1. the political position that has to be projected by the service (note: I use the word “service” advisedly) 2. presenting selective evidence to support that position 3. speculation to pump up the position (often due to lack of any evidence at all) 4. make the reporter the story and the target the monster, conversely make the aligned political party to hero and victim at the same time. 5. making the point to beware of all the fake news around the subject.

    Hence simply no point.

    And if sites like this get shut down there will be nothing left. Or maybe better said “there will be nothing right left”.

  24. Old Lefty

    Meanwhile Morrison yet again stands condemned by the revolutionary tribunal of the ABC Worker Soviet.

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-12/scott-morrison-fires-historic-change-not-one-his-critics-wanted/11861016

  25. Tom Appleton

    ABC “interviewer” Sandy Aloisi wanted to do nothing other than harangue him about the politics:

    Can this be the same Sandy Aloisi who was an ‘unbiased’ political reporter on Sydney radio 2UE? Did she hide her true nature until joining the ABC.

    Latika Bourke used to be on 2UE as well. She did a complete about face when she switched to the ABC, quickly picking up the ABC’s anti-conservative ‘vibe’.

  26. Squirrel

    Everything we get from the ABC (including the Speers interview this morning) persists with the idiot assumption that if Australia makes sufficiently dramatic sacrifices to the weather gods, the rest of the world will follow our inspiring example – which is why the USA has adopted our gun laws (with gun massacres now a thing of the past in that great nation), and why China is well on the way to democracy, with the secret (Australian) ballot to be adopted in the near future…..

    Back in the real world, grown ups know that international rules and system are observed by the great powers when it suits, and will be gamed and rorted by them and others to the maximum extent they can get away with.

    It’s high time these grim facts of life were explained by our PM, and then we can get on with the stuff we can actually control to reduce risks from fire and other disasters.

    As to this from Tingle’s piece –

    “Businesses in towns like Braidwood and Bungendore, which have long prospered on the holiday traffic from Canberra to the coast, say their streets are like ghost towns.”

    let’s not forget that a lot of the money sloshing around in Canberra derives from the industries that the climate crusaders want to shut down – but it’s so nicely laundered along the way that the crusaders are clueless about that.

  27. Lawrence Ayres

    Pity Tingle could not find another opinion to balance up her hatchet job. Why do we have to fund this garbage and these loud mouths?? Those billion animals ( I would like to see how he arrived at that number) could all get a simple headstone if we stopped funding their ABC. Australia could do quite a lot with a billion dollars a year and it would benefit far more people.

  28. OldOzzie

    Delingpole: Australian ‘Climate’ Fires Are Pure Fake News Propaganda

    Australia’s ‘climate’ fires are fast becoming the biggest fake news scare story of 2020. All the world’s stupidest, most annoying, hand-wringing, virtue-signalling leftists, luvvies, eco-loons, shyster politicians, second-rate activist scientists and other bottom feeders are jumping on the bandwagon.

    The fires themselves are all too real: no one is disputing that – or the damage they have done. At least 27 people have been killed – including four firemen; an estimated 15.6 million acres have been burned; hundreds of properties have been destroyed; hundreds of thousands of animals, both livestock and wildlife, have been incinerated.

    But the narrative that this has anything to do with ‘climate change’ is the purest eco-propaganda fiction. Here is the truth about Australia’s bush fires.

    This is about politics, not climate

    Australia’s leftists have never forgiven Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Liberal Party (ie Australia’s conservatives) for winning the general election in May 2019. That’s because it was billed as the ‘climate election’, which the left was supposed to win.

    As I wrote at the time, in Australia – as in the U.S. and the UK – the left thinks global warming is an election-winning issue. But the voters just aren’t interested.

    Everyone — encouraged by Australia’s left-leaning print media and rabidly left-wing state broadcaster ABC — was convinced that this was the election that was going to be won on climate change. Greenpeace actually billed it as a “climate election”. Australia’s Labor party, campaigning on a strongly anti-climate change agenda, was going to oust the incumbent Liberal (i.e. conservative) government because public concern about the environment was so overwhelmingly strong.

    Didn’t happen though, did it? Instead, the Liberals won.

    Now all the losing losers who lost in Australia are taking their revenge by demanding the resignation of Scott Morrison (aka ScoMo), supposedly because of his mishandling of the fires. They couldn’t beat him by fair means so now they’re trying to do it by foul means.

    #SackScoMo. Excuse me? Sack the PM? For what exactly? This is so pathetic, ridiculous and childish. The PM does not deserve to be sacked at all. If anything, this is just another virtue signalling useless & brainless protest. #auspol.

    pic.twitter.com/vk3oCZpAHI

    — Marcus Foo (@AStrongerOZ) January 10, 2020

    Nothing to do with climate change

    Even if Australia cancelled its economy tomorrow, there’d still be bush fires till the end of time

    What’s really causing the fires. 1. Arsonists

    What’s really causing the fires. 2. Fuel Load

    Australia has seen worse bush fires than these….

    Australians have long known what really causes bush fires…

  29. gary

    Interesting comments from previous reviews into Victorian bushfires. My conclusion from these reviews is that preventative burning of 5% of the bush is required annually to reduce the bushfire risk to an acceptable level. A 5% annual burnoff was briefly implemented in Victoria after the 2009 bushfires but was discontinued in 2015. In WA a 5% annual burnoff policy has been in operation since 1961 and it has been 100% effective in preventing major bushfires, and there have been no deaths from bushfires in that time.
    .
    From the 1983 Report of the Bushfire Review Committee on Bushfire Disaster Preparedness:

    40. In sum, therefore, fuel conditions, especially in forest areas where eucalpyts provided a truly explosive element, were such that all the potentials for disaster were primed and set.
    .
    117* In general, it was submitted that current standards of mitigation and preparedness are too low, thus reducing the effectiveness of counter-disaster arrangements. Some suggested reasons for this were as follows:
    – There is distinct apathy among certain sections of the community towards the bushfire problem.
    – A hand-out approach to disaster victims by governments also encourages an apathetic attitude.
    – The most appropriate measures were not always implemented because of the influence of groups advocating preservation of the environment.
    .
    119. The subject of fuel reduction was comprehensively covered in representations to and discussions with the Committee and a preponderance of opinion favoured increased emphasis on this aspect of mitigation. Points particularly emphasised were:
    – Fuel reduction by controlled burning is the only effective means of significantly reducing forest fires.

    .
    The 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission had the following interesting comments
    [p284]

    Since the 1960s the Department of Environment and Conservation in Western Australia has had a bold program of landscape-scale prescribed burning—more than 5 per cent a year—in the south-west forests of the state. There have been no high-intensity, landscape-scale bushfires in these forests since this program started.

    .
    On page 290 the Royal Commission Report quoted the Environment and natural resources committee’s 2008 report:

    The ENRC report of the Victorian Parliament’s Inquiry into the Impact of Public Land Management Practices on Bushfires in Victoria was explicit in relation to its recommendations concerning prescribed burning. The findings and recommendations included the following:The frequency and extent of prescribed burning have been insufficient for a number of decades for preservation of ecological processes and biodiversity across the public land estate.

    [The 2008 Report was one year before the 2009 bushfires during which 190 people died.]
    .
    On page 290 the Royal Commission report said:

    The Commission considers that a target of 5 to 8 per cent prescribed burning of public land is necessary for community safety and would not pose unacceptable environmental risks, particularly if priority is given to the dry eucalypt forests referred to by the expert panel.
    Recommendation 56. The State fund and commit to implementing a long-term program of prescribed burning based on an annual rolling target of 5 per cent minimum of public land estate.

    .
    In 2016 the Victorian Auditor General stated:

    In 2013, the Bushfires Royal Commission Implementation Monitor concluded that the previous planned burning target of five per cent of public land to reduce bushfire risk was not achievable, affordable or sustainable. The Inspector General of Emergency Management agreed and recommended that the government replace the hectare-based target with a risk reduction target that measures the impact of fuel management activities on the overall risk of bushfires.

Comments are closed.