Category: Matt’s Class

Asylum seekers

Asylum seekers

In reporting on the issues surrounding asylum seekers and refugees, the Australian government and media often present us with texts that create a narrow representation of asylum seekers in our country. They have through carefully constructing their language positioned the reader to hold a negative attitude towards asylum seekers and refugees. Quite often the media describe asylum seekers as ‘boat people’ or ‘illegal immigrants’ but it is stated by Australian Greek author Christos Tsiolkas that in fact 85% of boat people are genuine refugees and that as signatories to the UN refugee convention we are obliged to offer these people asylum. On the other side of the scale though coalition candidate Fiona Scott argues that the primary cause of traffic jams in sub urban places are initiated due to the increasing number of refugees and opposition leader Tony Abbott also states that ‘the point of the matter is if we stop the boats we will have less pressure on the budget’. That budget being the pension.  Abbott has injected a $420 million dollar budget into buying boats of Indonesian fisherman and stem the flow of refugees. The fact of the matter is, is that our governments and press have demonized boat people for 15 years. Organizations like the asylum seeker resource Centre worry they’re fighting a losing battle. Refugees are so generalized that many people are led to believe that our country is being flooded when in fact only around 8,600 refugees are made legal, since though refugees are so over generalized by the media and government this leads us to believe that boat people are the leading contributors to our influcuating traffic problems and that they are stealing our jobs, this then positions the reader to become defensive toward refugees. Abbott states that buying the fisherman’s boats will help stop the asylum seekers but several of the fishermen said that this would only allow then to buy bigger and better boats for the use of transporting refugees overseas. In relation to the arrival of asylum seekers in our borders, the word predominately used by the media announce it as ‘intercepted another boat’, the word intercept is used so often in our median that every time the public read about boat people they become hostile towards them as the word intercepted suggests wrongdoing by the boat’s passengers. It also positions the reader to accept the harsh treatment of refugees by constantly using the word ‘intercepted’. The lack of broader context in each and every text creates a narrow representation of the reality facing asylum seekers, this then leads to the reader feeling less sympathetic towards asylum seekers. Because of the broad narrow representation created by the media and government gives us less potential to think and speak critically about the asylum seeking topic, if the media gave the full information in articles it would allow us to be unbiased towards refugees. Yet since they provide information that fails to inform us of all aspects of the topic we act hostile towards the topic. I believe this is wrong as every human being should have equal rights no matter what color or where they are from.

 

 

 

 

Bibliography

 

http://theconversation.com/where-to-now-for-asylum-seeker-policy-under-tony-abbott-18010

 

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/liberal-candidate-links-asylum-seekers-to-traffic-jams-and-hospital-queues-20130903-2t1kw.html

 

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2013/07/22/asylum-seekers-where-australia-stands

 

http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2013/september/1377957600/christos-tsiolkas/why-australia-hates-asylum-seekers

 

http://www.news.com.au/world-news/ten-myths-around-asylum-seekers-arriving-on-boats-in-australian-waters/story-fndir2ev-1226676024840

 

Representation of children asylum seekers in Australian media

 

In reading the two news articles ‘Greens leader visits Pontville Detention Centre’ (Tasmanian Times, 2013) and ‘School children band together to send a message of welcome to asylum seekers (The Mercury 2013) the Australian media misrepresent children asylum seekers. Through a range of language features, texts in the media that are supposed to inform tend to create a narrow representation of their harsh reality and position readers to value equality for children.

In one news article ‘Greens leader visits Pontville Detention Centre’ (Tasmanian Times, 2013), language has been used to persuade readers to be against asylum seekers. The text shows readers that children in detention facilities are being under privileged in the media because they give society and authorities the impression that they are not welcome in our country. This writing places readers to value equality for innocent children in detention facilities, and shows that Australian media choose to ignore children immigrants in a professional aspect because their status isn’t seen highly in society and assume readers won’t want to hear about it.

A different news article from The Mercury, ‘School children band together to send message of welcome to asylum seekers’ (The Mercury, 2013) also puts forward a similar message as ‘Greens leader visits Pontville Detention Centre’. The representation of young asylum seekers in Australian media is that they don’t get the same chance of life as others do outside of detention centres. This article shows a school raising money to buy dictionaries for the children in Pontville so they can have an equal chance at receiving an education. The article quotes that year 6 students from St Mary’s in Hobart “displayed signs reading welcome in different languages” to the young migrants. This shows readers that children and schools are ready to welcome asylum seekers into our state and education system but people in the media represent them as vulnerable people.

 

The use of language in both news articles show readers that the media represent children as people who are not supposed to be in Australia and therefore shouldn’t receive the same things others outside detentions do. The lack of equality that is given in these texts shows that children asylum seekers in the media are generally represented as inferior to others in society outside of detention facilities.

References:

 

Tasmanian Times (2013) ‘Greens leader visits Pontville Detention Centre’ (online). Available from http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/pr-article/greens-leader-visits-pontville-detention-centre/

 

The Mercury (2013) ‘school children band together to send a message of welcome to asylum seekers’ (online). Available from http://www.themercury.com.au/news/tasmania/school-children-band-together-to-send-message-of-welcome-to-asylum-seekers/story-fnj4f7k1-1226709315196

 

 

 

Representations of Carbon Tax Decisions

Close to Australia’s federal election, discussion of the issues surrounding carbon pricing and other emission abatement systems has featured strongly in parties’ campaigns and, as such, in the media. These issues are not always evenly represented by media producers; articles like Annabel Hepworth’s ‘Carbon delay “to cost billions,” warns business’ (The Australian, 10th September 2013) giving an incomplete viewpoint on the subject. More balanced articles, such as ‘Carbon tax change in new PM’s sights,’ by Dan Harrison, (The Age, 28th June 2013) are not as prominent.

News media often amplify the perceived effect that climate change abatement schemes have on Australia’s economic systems. Journalists for papers like ‘The Australian,’ and other News Limited publications, focus almost exclusively on the monetary implications of systems like the Labor government’s carbon tax and proposed emissions trading scheme, as well as downplaying the importance and effectiveness of allegedly expensive schemes.  The headline of ‘Carbon delay “to cost billions,” warns business’ immediately brings readers’ focus to the carbon tax’s financial influence. (The Australian, 10th September 2013) At the same time, the article’s position on the front page of the paper promotes the significance of that influence. Also, by using the word ‘warns’ in relation to the statement – rather than a more neutral term such as ‘says’ or ‘state’ – Hepworth implies that the project affects Australians entirely negatively; that the money is being spent on something that is not worthy of it. The article expresses the opinions of people such as the C.E.O of the Minerals Council of Australia, The Business Council of Australia’s deputy executive, and other executives of bodies involved with carbon-intensive industries, which have the most to lose through a carbon pricing system. The only other opinions quoted in the article are those of Politicians urging that the tax be removed. This bias balloons the conceived negative effects of a carbon pricing system, influencing readers to be fearful of such a system. This sort of prejudiced reporting in a widely read publication, if presented repeatedly, changes the public’s view on issues like carbon pricing, preventing them from making informed decisions. As such, similar reports undermine the principles of democracy by influencing the decisions of the public.

Reports, at other times, explore both environmental and economic issues surrounding the carbon tax, allowing their audience to consider it more comprehensively. Dan Harrison’s article, while centered on Mr Rudd’s intentions to alter the scheme, presents the opinions of politicians with differing outlooks on the idea, leading readers to scrutinize a range of estimations. Also, Harrison uses phrases like “[The] Prime Minister will dump the fixed carbon price” (The Age, 28th June 2013) to emphasize the suddenness of Rudd’s decision. This may prompt readers to question the reason for that decision and whether it is well conceived or not. Reports like ‘Carbon tax change in new PM’s sights’ afford their audience some enquiry into decisions surrounding emission-reduction programs. However, such articles on the topic are outnumbered in popular media by opinion articles and inadequate reportage, giving audiences a skewed view of these issues.

These articles represent the issues surrounding climate change abatement schemes with differing levels of comprehensiveness, giving their readers different ability to make informed decisions on these topics. Dan Harrison’s article presents a range of perspectives on the carbon tax and questions decisions made in relation to it, allowing its audience to properly consider the system and the decisions made. Annabel Hepworth’s article presents a one-sided representation of the system and decisions relating to it, depriving its readers of adequate ability to make decisions on the subject.

 

Harrison, D. (2013) ‘Carbon tax change in new PM’s sights,’ The Age, 28/6/2013 [Online] Available at: http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/carbon-tax-change-in-new-pms-sights-20130628-2p0vd.html

Hepworth, A. (2013) ‘Carbon delay “to cost billions,” warns business’ The Australian, 10/9/2013 [Online] Available at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/election-2013/carbon-delay-to-cost-billions-warns-business/story-fn9qr68y-1226715692989

 

Syria

Most Australian produced reporting about the civil war in Syria during the lead up to the election was focused  on the politicians views and ideas about possible military action in Syria, not the actual conflict. However the texts that were focused on the issue represent the civil war in Syria as a having a worldwide impact.

The Sydney Morning Herald’s article ‘Syria: Where things stand now’ describes different global powers’ actions and decisions in relation to civil war in Syria as an “international puzzle”. This metaphorical description represents the war as having a significant impact on the decisions of countries and governments around the world. The article uses the phrase “the world waits” while introducing the article. The use of the word “world” suggests that the civil war in Syria is of worldwide importance. Suggesting that the civil war in Syria affects everyone makes the article seem more interesting as it personalises the issue and makes the reader feel more inclined to read the article and be engaged with the topic.

The same article represents foreign military intervention in a negative way. The article is divided into 13 sections each based on a separate people group or country. Each section shows the position of that people group or country’s on foreign military intervention. Seven of the  sections opinions are opposed military action, 3 sections support a military strike and the remaining 3 sections are undecided or neutral. This structure creates a negative representation of military action in Syria. This fosters negativity in the audience in relation to intervention of foreign military powers in Syria.

Another article from the Sydney morning herald, ‘Syria: What you need to know’,  creates a negative representation of the Syrian government. The text positions the audience to be against the Syrian government by criticising the government’s actions and using negative descriptions of the government.  the article repeatedly describes the Syrian government in a negative way through the use of adjectives with negative connotations such as “dictatorship”. The word “dictatorship” is usually used as a criticism and has negative connotations to do with corruption in the government. This creates a creates a negative representation of the Syrian government in the text. This representation is likely to make the reader be critical of the actions of the Syrian government.

The title of the article also represents the civil war in Syria as an important personal issue. First, the heading personalises the issue through the use of the word “you”. This makes the issue more personal. It then adds importance to the issue by claiming that you “need” to  know the information you are about to receive in the article. This represents the war in Syria as an important issue that should be important to the reader. This heading is also likely to make the reader interested in the article, therefore making it more likely for them to read it.

Although the article positions the reader against the Syrian Assad regime, it does not support intervention from the US military and positions the audience to see the US military as powerless to resolve the conflict in Syria. It describes the US military’s options as “all bad” and claims that there are “no viable options”. These descriptions create a negative representation of The US military. This places the reader in a position against foreign military intervention in Syria.

Both of these articles  use different language features to represent the civil war in Syria as an important global issue. Also, they both texts create a negative representation of foreign intervention military intervention in Syria. The title of the article ‘Syria: What you need to know’ positions the reader to be concerned with the conflict in Syria by personalising the issue and suggesting it is of great importance. This title may also have been used to engage the reader and make them more likely to read the article.

 

References

Fisher, MThe Sydney Morning Herald (2012) ‘Syria: What you need to know” [Online] Available from http://www.smh.com.au/world/syria-what-you-need-to-know-20130903-2t20m.html [Accessed 12 September 2013]

 

 

The Sydney Morning Herald (2012) ‘Syria: Where things stand now’ [Online] Available from http://www.smh.com.au/world/syria-where-things-stand-now-20130903-2t3g1.html [Accessed 12 September 2013]

Legalising Euthanasia in Australia

After being asked to find an issue of interest in relation to current federal election, I found many texts that showed different representations of the issue of Euthanasia.  The text’s Green’s push for Euthanasia bill, and Voluntary Euthanasia Party is Born both shown on the ABC NEWS website, positions the viewer to accept Greens MP Cate Faehrmann’s representation that Euthanasia is a simple, straight forward issue and should be legalised in New South Wales. In stark contrast, the article No place for euthanasia written by founder of HOPE: Preventing Euthanasia & Assisted Suicide Paul Russell, Euthanasia is represented as a complex issue, with many consequences, positioning the viewer to accept that it should not be legalised.

Language features throughout the texts allow the viewer to accept the values presented. Throughout the texts Green Push for Euthanasia Bill and Voluntary Euthanasia Party is Born, the use of statistics positions the audience to accept certain values. An example of this is shown in Green Push for Euthanasia Bill with the use of statistics is in relation to the Australia’s opinion on Euthanasia. “When surveyed, 85-per cent of the population agrees with euthanasia under those terms.” The use of this question positions the viewer to value its content, as the percentage is of high majority. The word ‘agree’ also reinforces the positioning that the article is trying to present, that Euthanasia should be legalised. In the same way, the text No place for euthanasia uses statistics to position the viewer to accept values, however these values represent why Euthanasia should not be legalised. Like Green Push for Euthanasia Bill, the text also chose a high percentage statistic, to make the argument valid. The quote tells of a recent survey being held in the UK, where “…70% of people living with disabilities feared the advent of euthanasia and assisted suicide”. The word ‘fear’, represents euthanasia as a thing to be scared or fearful of, and because the quote is positioned after Russell explains Euthanasia and its impact on the vulnerable and the elderly, it positions the viewer to feel sympathy and question ethics.  The phrase ‘assisted suicide’ also represents euthanasia as an illegal, and morally wrong thing to do, and positions the viewer to think about their moralistic judgments.

Positioning the viewer through emotions is another writing style used by the text Voluntary Euthanasia Party is Born. The article positions the viewer to feel sympathy, and to agree that Euthanasia should be legalised with the examples of three terminally ill candidates who launched an election campaign with Voluntary Euthanasia Party. The text uses the quotation of man Martin Burgess, who states that the campaign will be ‘physically tough’, but yet he will still continue to “get this issue as high a profile as possible”. The example of a person wanting to die with the use of Euthanasia makes the viewer believe that there is legitimate reasoning for it, therefore positioning them to agree to make Euthanasia legalised.

All texts researched show the importance of language features, in the use of positioning the audience to position values. In the texts studied, it becomes clear that the same use of language features show opposing representations for the issue of legalising Euthanasia in Australia.

By Gemma Evans

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Greens push for Euthanasia bill – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). 2013. Greens push for Euthanasia bill – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-02/euthanasia/4665738. [Accessed 12 September 2013].

Opinion: No place for euthanasia – Australian Ageing Agenda: Aged Care and Retirement Industry News and Issues. 2013. Opinion: No place for euthanasia – Australian Ageing Agenda: Aged Care and Retirement Industry News and Issues. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.australianageingagenda.com.au/2011/05/31/article/Opinion-No-place-for-euthanasia/HEDGJQUKQF.html. [Accessed 12 September 2013].

Voluntary Euthanasia Party is born – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). 2013. Voluntary Euthanasia Party is born – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation). [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-08-19/euthanasia-party-born/4897306. [Accessed 12 September 2013].

 

The Representation of Climate Change

 

In creating a representation of the issue of climate change in the recent federal election, reportage shows the effect that climate change will have and is having on Australia’s environment and as a country. Two articles from The Guardian newspaper, Australia’s Federal Election Just Couldn’t Face Up To Climate Change by Graham Readfearn and If Abbott is Elected, Australia’s Natural Wonders Will Gradually be Rubbed Away by George Monibot, discuss the lack of prominence given to climate change in the election, despite its support as an important issue by much of society. Text creators use emotive language and description to privilege the action needed to be taken towards this issue.

Descriptive and emotive language is used by text creators to show and support that climate change is a valid issue in current Australian society. An article written by Graham Readfearn uses explicit facts and events to allow little room to question the fact that climate change is important and does exist. He does this by using language such as, ‘the hottest summer ever recorded in Australia,’ and ‘…most widespread extreme heat wave.’ By mentioning these, he makes clear the effect that climate change is having, and positions the audience to question why politicians are not prioritizing the issue. George Monbiot also describes the destruction of cultural assets, and uses it to position audiences. He says under Tony Abbott, “Australia’s natural wonders will gradually be rubbed away.” This language suggests from the word ‘wonders’, that Australia strongly values its environment and that by not acting on climate change a part of its culture and identity will be destroyed.

Australia’s climate is an important aspect of its representation and culture. The article by George Monbiot describes the effect that dredging and dumping of material in inside the important Australian icon the Great Barrier Reef. “It will be a simple declaration that nothing – not even the Great Barrier Reef, on which so much of Australia’s image and revenue depends- will be allowed to stand in the way of extraction and destruction.”And, “If Abbott is elected, the natural wonders that distinguish this nation will gradually be rubbed away until it looks like anywhere else: a degraded landscape and seascape, supporting just a few generic exotic species.” Similarly, Readfearn brings in the representation of Australia as a country which would possibly be viewed negatively by asking, “If Australia is led by a Government doing nothing meaningful to tackle fossil fuel burning on its own shores while backing an export boom, then who knows how the country will be branded?” By creating an image of Australia after the effect of climate change have taken place, Monibot and Readfearn successfully position the reader to see the lack of action taken towards climate change by politicians negatively. This negative position then causes the audience to value the environmental assets that form part of Australia’s cultural representation.

Both of the texts studied use language to show that climate change is a relevant and important issue in Australian society. The texts successfully use language to position the audiences to question the result of neglecting to act on climate change, and the effect that it will have on the representation of Australia and its culture.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Readfearn, G. Planet Oz 2013. Australia. Hosted by The Guardian. [Accessed 12/09/2013]  http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2013/sep/05/australia-election-climate-change

 

Monbiot, G. If Abbott is elected, Australia’s natural wonders will gradually be rubbed away, 2013. Published on The Guardian. [Accessed 12/09/2013]  http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/05/abbott-climate-change-election?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

The Representation of the Australian Labor Party and the Liberal Party of Australia on Marriage Equality – as seen on their respective websites

The Australian Labor Party (ALP) and the Liberal Party of Australia have different stances in regard to the issue of gay marriage, and on their official websites each have represented the issue very differently. While the liberal party stand strictly against gay marriage, the ALP have recently changed their position to stand for gay marriage. Initially, Former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, stood against the issue, however in the lead up to the federal election, he changed his stance to support the movement. Whether this move was a genuine change of heart or an election gimmick remains to be seen.

 

The ALP’s website positions viewers to value marriage equality and foregrounds the issue. On their homepage there are two articles on it, with only one article for the other issues the page promotes. The articles position the viewer to value marriage equality and are presented in bright colours and use positive language. One of the articles that is advertised in ‘Jamie’s fight for equality’, the article shows a older man, beaming and wearing the rainbow symbol of equality. The man’s happiness is used to make the viewer see the ALP as a force of good in the gay community. The other article, is a YouTube video that presents the reforms the ALP has made for the gay community, this use of a highly visual medium is targeted at youth, those who find it easier to watch a video and spend more time on the internet. While the ALP has made many promises to the LGBTI community, they were initially against the move for gay marriage and there is the possibility that they are merely using the issue to increase their popularity among young voters.

 

In contrast to the ALP’s page, the Liberal’s have made the issue of gay marriage very difficult to find. From their home page another page must be accessed to find the option to search their site and after searching for marriage equality, the only mention of it is in transcripts of Q&A’s, where it is briefly mentioned. This silence in the Liberals site positions the viewer to accept that the issue of marriage equality is at worst, non existent and at best, of no concern. The position of the liberal party has always been against marriage equality, in the words of Mr. Abbott  “Obviously we have a clear position that we don’t support gay marriage as a party…”. The use of the word ‘obviously’ could reflect the length of time that the party has stood against the issue, however it could also be seen as influencing readers to assume that to stand against marriage equality is the obvious thing to do.

 

Both the ALP and the Liberal Party of Australia have very different views on marriage equality and represent those views very differently on their respective websites. While the Liberal party have a negative view on the issue, their integrity cannot be questioned as their representation of the issue reflects their historical stance. The ALP however, changed their stance very near the election and have flooded the media and their site with their support for the movement. After historically being completely against the issue, this sudden change of tactics could be seen by many as an election gimmick.

-Tom Roberston

Bibliography:

Tony Abbott transcript – Joint Doorstop Interview, Queanbeyan | Liberal Party of Australia. 2013. Tony Abbott transcript – Joint Doorstop Interview, Queanbeyan | Liberal Party of Australia. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/06/20/tony-abbott-transcript-joint-doorstop-interview-queanbeyan. [Accessed 6 September 2013].

 

Australian Labor Party. 2013. Australian Labor Party. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.alp.org.au. [Accessed 6 September 2013].

Marriage Equality In Australia

Marriage Equality Push in Australia

It is exciting to see that the Australian people have demanded a change in legislation with regard to gay marriage. Of course with Australia being a democratic nation one has to respect these requests by discussing them in parliament. But with a majority of politicians opposed to a conscience vote how can Australian people gain the right to be married to the one they love no matter what gender?

 

Recently in Parliament many labour MPs and Senators finally agreed to allow a change to the marriage act and to allow a conscience vote, however this surprising moment quickly turned sour after Julia Gillard and a few Labour Senators crossed sides to join Tony Abbott. Previously Abbott and Gillard had been more than happy to preach their anti-gay marriage opinions to the public and their fellow party members. This anti-gay stance potentially casts a discriminative persona on both of them and brings in to question Gillard’s leadership.

 

Gillard has made commonplace her stance on same-sex marriage. In doing so she has upset many Australians  who share opposing thoughts; however Miss Gillard assures that the government is changing discriminative legislation to give all homosexual couples the same rights (such as combined Medicare) that a “married couple” would have. Gillard hides the discriminative nature of her decision by offering alternatives aimed at satisfying same-sex couples.

 

Like Gillard and Abbott, Shadow Attorney-General George Brandis wishes to see the Marriage Act stay ‘straight’. Brandis gave explanations to the meaning of marriage, and how changing it could possibly upset people who value the words current meaning (06.00), “Marriage is a unique institution that has a deep cultural, and for most Australians religious significance” He also said that “it should not be changed until there is a significant community consensus in favour of doing so” Brandis touches on some deep meanings regarding the principle of marriage here, making the justification of disallowing same sex marriage seem reasonable. His comments, however, serve to postpone any change in the marriage act or a conscience vote.

 

In the last two years the fight for gay marriage has only increased, and it will continue to do so. The support of the Greens party, through retired Greens leader Bob Brown, who is homosexual, has shifted people’s attitudes throughout Australia. Brown was a devoted Christian during the time that he was discovering his sexuality and because of these conflicts he had a lot of trouble with accepting it and coming out. As well as being a doctor and the party leader of Greens Australia, Bob has long supported gay marriage and has become a symbol not just for homosexuals but for all Australians.

 

Brown and all other Greens Party members strongly believe that sexuality should not be discriminated, and people should be respected for who they are. The Green’s sexuality principles have been respected by the government and all but one have been enforced as legislation. Can you guess which principle that is?   Christine Milne addresses the Senate concerning the need for marriage equality in Australia. In her speech Milne mentioned that the UK, USA and NZ are all in the progress of allowing same sex marriage. What does this say for Australia? Does the progress in these democratic countries suggest there is discriminative nature within the Australian Government and/or Prime Minister Gillard? Milne aims her talk at those who deny the need for democratic evolution in this county and stresses the need for individual rights for all including the gay members of our society and the removal of all discrimination.

 

The facts gained from polling between 2009-2012 tell the story: the Greens and 64% of Australian people want marriage equality and 76% want a conscience vote. On the other hand Prime Minister Gillard, some of her devoted party followers, 36% of Australians and the entire Liberal Party wish to keep marriage as being between a man and woman. Undeniably we are a democratic country but denying rights by disallowing a conscious vote could result in genuine health concerns in the gay community and ignoring democratic principles. Julia Gillard said it herself that this country is moving forward, but when I comes to marriage equality we are moving very slowly. Hopefully In time the government will see the error of its ways and follow the new cultural and social norms like in UK, USA and NZ. Is a referendum a possible solution? Time will tell.

Mackenzie Reekie

 

References                                                        

Australian Marriage Equality online 2012. Available from: http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/ (accessed 1st October 2012)

LAUREN WILSON From: The Australian September 19, 2012 ‘Julia Gillard sides with Coalition for gay marriage vote”  Available from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/julia-gillard-sides-with-coalition-for-gay-marriage-vote/story-fn59niix-1226477336859 (accessed 1st October 2012)

ABC Q&A (Youtube) April 23, 2012. ‘God, Homosexuality and Bob Brown’. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPCkWbeqpjE  (accessed 1st October 2012)

(Youtube) Christine Milne speech 17/9/2012. ‘Marriage equality’. Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjyQRubhx9g (accessed 2nd  October 2012)

ABC Q&A (Youtube) Aug 16, 2010. ‘Tony Abbott talks about gay marriage’. Available from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSWlyhfvWUQ (accessed 2nd October 2012)

The Greens. The Green’s sexuality and gender identity principles. Available from:  http://greens.org.au/policies/care-for-people/sexuality-and-gender-identity   (accessed 2nd October 2012)

Australian Labor (Youtube) Jul 17, 2010. Julia Gillard: ‘Let’s move Australia forward’. Available from:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyR2pu_pY_I&feature=related (accessed 2nd October 2012)

ABC Q&A (Youtube) 9 Aug, 2010. ‘Julia Gillard says No to Gay Marriage’ Available from:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1Vbz4Tg3PM  (accessed 2nd October 2012)

ABC Q&A (Youtube) Nov 8, 2010. ‘Gay marriage question’ (accessed 2nd October 2012) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ5LLSdEWZA (accessed 2nd October 2012)

Bid to Ban the Burqa

In April this year, a law was passed in France; Europe’s biggest Muslim population, banning the wearing full-face veils in public places. In Australia, there has been an ongoing debate in the media in which numerous people have proposed a bid to ban the wearing of burqa’s in public places.

It seems the online media predominantly shows the story from one side; being the side that is for the banning of the burqa. So the question of whether the Muslim women who wear burqas are represented fairly and honestly in the media should be asked.

In an article written by Cory Bernardi, a senator for South Australia, he says “the burka is no longer simply the symbol of female repression and Islamic culture, it is now emerging as the preferred disguise of bandits and n’er do wells” and also states that “the burka has no place in Australian society”. In the article he talks about an incident in which someone used a burqa to disguise his or her identity to rob a man in Sydney. He also raises a number of other reasons for the banning of the burqa. He says “that the burka represents the repressive domination of men over women”. Bernardi writes about female equality being one of the key values in our secular society and that for woman to be covered in such a repressive manner does not adhere to Australian values.

These opinions about woman’s rights and equality are one’s that can be seen in a majority of the articles that are for the banning of the buqra. However the after much searching on the Internet, I found very little information into the insight of the opinions of any Muslim woman. This could be seen as an injustice of the truth because they are not represented fairly.

It is not compulsory for women who follow the Islamic religion to wear the burqa. Therefore it can be assumed that it is a personal choice to wear it. It’s all very well to say that you have their best interests in mind, but if you don’t know how these Muslim women feel about the issue, then an accurate assumption cannot be made. From my understanding, most Muslim women in Australia have made a conscious and educated decision to wear the veil and feel empowered by it. In the end, I get the feeling that the real issue here is not that people think that females are oppressed and forced to wear the burqa against their will, it’s the fact that people no longer feel safe not knowing the identity of some individuals. After just a few incidents in which the burqa was misused, does not mean it should be banned. The claim made by senator Cory Bernardi that the burqa is “un-Australian” is one that I find to be untrue. Personally I think that the banning of the burqa is un-Australian. As an Australian I have pride in our multiculturalism and acceptance of different cultures. There is a fine line between a woman’s rights and her religious freedom, and frankly it should be totally up to them to make their own decision within their own believes.

 BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Gaurdian  2012, France begins ban on niqab and burqa, The Gaurdian, viewed 13 September 2012, <http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/11/france-begins-burqa-niqab-ban>

Cory Bernardi, CB  2012, The Drum Opinion, ABC, viewed 13 September 2012, http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/33978.html.

Virginia Haussegger. (2010). The burqa is a war on women. Available: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-burqa-is-a-war-on-women-20100520-vnp3.html. Last accessed 10 September 2012.

 

“Is David Walsh Guilty?”

Gambling is a form of risk taking behaviour, of which many people partake in everyday. The people that try their luck quite often lose and suffer the aftershocks with their lifestyle, friendships and family relationships. There is however a way people have made the chance of winning far greater. David Walsh was one of those people. He was born in 1961 in Tasmania and he is to this day a multimillionaire.

David obtained his wealth through his efforts in gambling. David came in contact with Zeljko Ranogajec, they became friends. The two of them spent some time in sydney where they wagered in larger pools. They created a club called The punters club which consisted with 19 members. The Club had become very sophisticated and had later expanded into sporting events such as horse racing dog racing and the like. David used his fortune to purchase many different pieces of art. in 2001 he invested in a small museum in Berriedale peninsula, that he called ‘Moorilla Museum of Antiquities’. In 2007 he closed the museum to undergo in renovations worth over 75 million dollars, which went on for another 3 and a half years. In 2011 the reopening went ahead and MONA (Museum of Old and New Art) had created a unique tourist attraction for Tasmania.

Although he has made an enormous fortune along the way with investment of about 180 million dollars in Mona, he is now under the threat from ATO (Australian Tax Office) in a retrospect tax of over 37.7 million dollars plus interest. The ATO are right in taking the money, it is in our law. No one should be able to dodge taxes if others are made to pay even if it is over 37 million dollars. David Walsh disagree’s, he is fighting against the ATO believing that he should not have to pay the amount of tax given.

In a recent report provided by ABC Lateline in July 2012 gives David Walsh’s personal opinion from questions given to him about his fees. In the interview he states that the ATO told him he had to pay 7 million dollars in tax in 2003 and was never asked for a interview to explain the the increasing tax being handed to him. Hamish Fitzsimmons the reporter says the ATO say that he is in a business and they have charge him more for every year. David argues and quotes; “according to the ATO’s definition of a business, I say no, we don’t try to minimize the risk, we dont keep records and we dont employ staff”. There is however a flaw with what he says, a business doesn’t have to be run by a boss paying his staff it can any form of a group of people receiving profits annually without loss or gain.

There are mixed opinions over whether Walsh should pay his way in tax bills;  some have commented suggesting it would be unjust for the government to enforce this bill due to his overwhelming support from him to Tasmanian tourism. Lara Giddings, Tasmanian’s Premier states “an average visitor who comes to see MONA actually stays around about nine nights in Tasmania. So the flow-on for our restaurants, our wider tourism community is very big”. This has reflected our states gain from Mr Walsh’s efforts.

Despite David Walsh’s plea to resist the taxation demands, the Government have proceeded with the bill. The debate over Walsh’s taxes remain as a hurdle for MONA’s development as this may have have an effect on further maintenance costs.

by Tom Mitchell

Adrian Lowe and Andrew Darby (2012) ‘Support floods in for MONA founder in tax row’ [online] http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/art-and-design/support-floods-in-for-mona-founder-in-tax-row-20120725-22oy5.html [accessed: 6th September 2012]

Angus Grigg And Hannah Low (2012) ‘The Gambler’ [online] http://afr.com/p/national/the_gambler_GwoSmf5IXaVFjmpyYXNu9J [accessed: 5th september 2012]

Hamish Fitzsimmons (2012) ‘MONA founder claims ATO backflip on tax’ [online] http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2012/s3551796.htm [accessed: 7th September 2012]

Mathew Denholm, Tasmanian correspondent (2012) ‘MONA in ‘precarious’ spot as tax office chases gambler David Walsh’s millions’ [online] http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/treasury/mona-in-precarious-spot-as-tax-office-chases-gambler-david-walshs-millions/story-fn59nsif-1226418380383 [accessed: 6th september 2012]

Vanda Carson, Daily Telegraph (2012) ‘Millionaire gambler and art collector David Walsh hits back at the Australian Taxation Office claim’ [online] http://www.news.com.au/money/money-matters/millionaire-gambler-and-art-collector-david-walsh-hits-back-at-the-australian-taxation-office-claim/story-e6frfmd9-1226425030341 [accessed: 6th september 2012]

Wikipedia (2012) ‘David Walsh (art collector)’ [online] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Walsh_(art_collector [accessed: 5th September 2012]