Prev
Next

Gillard’s people’s assembly ignores the people

Sophie Trevitt

by Sophie Trevitt

28 Jul 05:40am

Must Reads

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics - this is a caption

Facebook’s being a boob over breastfeeding pics

100

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame - this is a caption

Don’t blame the beautiful game for riot shame

35

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53? - this is a caption

Can you be a “different kind of girl” when you’re 53?

22

Filed under: Carbon Price, Climate Change, Election 2010, Ets, Julia Gillard

41 comments

On Friday, Gillard announced Labor’s climate change policy in the lead up to the election. She announced her intentions to create a citizens assembly to evaluate the evidence for climate change and confirmed that an interim price on carbon would not be considered by the Labor government at least until 2012.

Cartoon by The Australia's Jon Kudelka

Ironically, she announced this somewhat vacuous, indecisive plan at the University of Queensland – theoretically a place for young people to “move forward” and a place of long-term sustainable innovation.  Furthermore, she made this announcement to an audience of young people.  Young people, who have a stake in their government taking decisive action on climate change to protect their futures.

I am all for community consensus when it means taking practical and tangible steps to ensure that the interests of stakeholders are respected in decision-making processes.

I am all for community consensus when it means bringing together and consolidating the ideas of diverse groups of people so that a cohesive and inclusive plan can be exacted.

I am all for community consensus when it comes about because of strong political leadership and a genuine desire to consult the people who the policy will affect.

The problem is when ‘consensus’ becomes synonymous with delay and a ‘citizens committee’ is bizarrely deemed necessary to represent the views of a minority who don’t believe in established scientific fact, or are not concerned with preserving our planet for future generations.

Gillard has explained her unusual move to establish a citizen’s assembly by emphasising the need to foster a consensus amongst the public on the course of action taken deal with climate change.

It is unclear, however, why Gillard thinks that a consensus is lacking. 70% of Australians are convinced that climate change is happening and is man-made (according to Newspoll and CSIRO polling). It’s reasonable to say that having established that the earth is heating up, the Australian public is looking to their leaders to try and stop the process before the consequences are too great. Establishing a committee to determine what is already agreed upon seems like yet another time-wasting and patience-trying exercise in political manipulation.

Despite public hope, Gillard also confirmed that Labor will not be reconsidering its refusal to put a price on carbon; and furthermore will not review the decisions made until 2012 (meaning that any sustainable reform will most likely be put off until the next election in 2013).


Furthermore, Gillard’s resistance to implementing a price on carbon is estranging an increasingly disillusioned portion of the population who understand the necessity of long term and sustainable industry reform. All of Abbott’s hyperbolic talk of a Great Big New Tax has given Gillard the perfect platform to get away with avoiding any sort of assertive leadership. These fear mongering tactics mean that once again we are put on hold when it comes to sustainably shifting our economy away from carbon and towards renewables in a way that holds big polluters accountable for the waste they generate.

To be fair, Gillard’s announcement wasn’t all citizens committees and hot air. She did commit $1 billion to connecting renewable energy projects to the grid and established that higher standards would have to be met before new coal power stations could be built (of course this does not apply to the 15 new coal stations that are already in the works). It seems though that her policy announcement neither offered the public new and well thought out information, or even fostered the feel good inclusiveness she seemed to be aiming for.

The Australian public don’t feel respected or consulted. They have been patronised and sidelined as election pressure and political whim dictate policy decision.

The big business to whom Gillard recently pandered when whittling down the mining tax, aren’t jumping for joy either, as once again they are left in the dark. They still don’t know whether to prepare for an eventual carbon tax, or for how long their unsustainable production of pollutants will be safe from intervention.

Gillard stepped up as Rudd stepped out and had an opportunity to “get the Labor party back on track”. Instead she has procrastinated and manipulated and avoided demonstrating any of the leadership that we’d hope is in the job description for being Prime Minister. 

Gillard is rapidly throwing away her chances of catching any of the progressive voters who once aligned themselves with Labor.

Most commented

332Is it sexist? We've got nothing to compare it to
298It takes selective memory to call Howard era a golden age
296Why do our universities teach shonky "magic"?
249Gillard's mapping a route but will probably still be routed
172Friday dilemma: Should smacking be illegal?
170A comedy of errors that's not very funny
163Julia Gillard is on the highway to the danger zone
147Outlaw bikies cannot be judged outside the law

41 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Eric says:

      06:57am | 28/07/10

      So you’re all for community consensus - except when it might deny you some policy you want.

      Reply

    • Sherlock says:

      03:02pm | 28/07/10

      You got that one right. Seeing that belief in man-made climate change is less than 50% of the population I wonder what the chances are of this 150 person citizens assembly containing at least 75 climate change sceptics. Very little I’d suggest.

      As the world freezes during this ‘hottest year ever” more and more people are realising you how much they were fooled by the climate change alarmists and the reaction has been swift and savage.After seeing what the emission trading schemes have done to both the European and Californian economies it will be a brave government indeed that embraces any carbon trading scheme As a result, country after country has backed away from emissions trading or carbon pricing.

      The USA, despite the democrats controlling both houses, have no hope of getting their climate bill passed and those governments still pretending to be concerned are only paying lip service. The best example of this is of course the “delay is denial” Australian government. The so-called citizens forum is only an obvious delay mechanism. A way of looking busy on the issue while in reality doing nothing.

      The battle is over and the sceptics have won. Climate change alarmists are now getting treated with the same condescension we used to save for those who still think Y2K was a genuine threat.

    • All says:

      05:08pm | 28/07/10

      When questioned about not getting the answer she wanted from the forum Wong replied that they would have to go back into the room to receive more lecturing from the advisors. There is no hope that the forum would ever be filled with anyone other than the hand picked party faithful briefed with the chosen answer to be trotted out at the required time, and if the answer is not correct then go back in and don,t come out until it is the answer you were told to present.

    • Jack Thomas says:

      05:40pm | 28/07/10

      Er, why are we asking for a bunch of Mum and Dad’s to develop an opinion on Climate change, and an ETS strategy?

      If you thought Rudd was a poll-whore, Julia has just upped his 2020.

      Is Labor suggesting some sort of Khymer Rouge thing whereby the smartest in our soceity should be killed off and we let the moronic talk back radio callers dictate policies etc.?

      Gillard has just demeaned the debate to the dumbest level.

      I want to live in an Australia where we look to the smarter ones for answers, not the ones with Labor party memberships or factional alliances.

      All we need now is Penny Wong playing the ‘poor me, I am asian and a lesbian’ card (without any proof or ability to call her on that spurious claim)...what, you mean she already has?

    • Rufus T Firefly says:

      06:47pm | 28/07/10

      Im seeking work as a citizen assembler,I am from a working family and like to move forward, I would like to have all my internet activities monitored and am prepared to stab my nearest colleagues in the face to further my career,all suggestions are welcome

    • dead to me says:

      08:05am | 28/07/10

      Gillard lacks experience and clearly doesn’t know what she is doing. She only cares about herself - parental leave, pension increases don’t apply to her. How can she talk about working families when she hasn’t ever had to deal with reality?

      Reply

    • Steely Dan says:

      10:45am | 28/07/10

      @ dead to me

      Are you saying that because she doesn’t have kids she doesn’t know what working families are about?

    • Beagle says:

      11:28am | 28/07/10

      @ Steely Dan
      I think she is. absent father Tony must get all his information from Mrs. Abbott who deals with the reality. I’m sure she knows what it is like to live on struggle street.

    • Phil says:

      08:58am | 28/07/10

      Sophie

      Would you agree to a simple plain price on carbon for everyone. No exceptions. Surely that is the fairest system and one which is user pays. Everybody pays for the carbon they emit. No rebates for those on lower incomes, no exemptions for higher poluters. Just really an increase in the cost of living of probably 10%.

      No payments to third world countries to stop them cutting up the forests, just technology for us here in Australia. Just expect a large reduction in your lifestyle due to the cost, and the fact that we are the only ones doing it.

      Didnt think you lot would go for that type of system. After all most of this clobal warming/climate change is just social engineering dressed up, designed to take from the filthy rich and give to the poor.

      Remind me how much the planet will be cooler by this action by Australia in 2020?

      Reply

    • Adam Diver says:

      09:48am | 28/07/10

      Couldn’t agree more. As a small country and a small polluter there is only two real courses of action that we can take. Anything other is simply action in making us feel better, what side of politics makes you feel better without getting results?

      Anyway the two real course of action are:

      1. Heavy investment in research. The current renewables are nowhere near able to handle our base load, and no, we are not going to live in the dark. So as far as I am aware thorium is a good replacement for nuclear, with less waste and no chance of explosions but is at least 20 years away. Hydroelectric is efficient but we dont like dams. Tidal and Geothermal are promising. And solar and wind are a pipe dream unless we can store power efficiently. This is something Australia can be directly involved in.

      2. Get a worldwide agreement on taxing pollution (carbon dioxide). Unless China, India, the US and Brazil are involved then any taxing regime is completely and utterly useless. Although getting a worldwide agreement would be difficult, particular telling third world countries we are going to substantially increase thier cost of living.

    • asstoyourassembly says:

      11:08am | 28/07/10

      Onya Phil. Finally, perspective. QLD regulators have just advised that electricity prices will be upping big time in the next three years… what do people expect when a “price on carbon” was to be applied - did you think the supplier would just take that one on the chin? People whinge about the cost of living while they drive their Prius (because the are so “aware”) and at the end of the day they send their three kids into their three seperate rooms to play seperate Wiis on their seperate Plasmas. People are so out of touch with what all this means and how it is going to impact on them. All for what? We have no idea what kind of impact it may or may not have. I for one think that they way forward is to promote conserving energy. Use what we have more effectively and stop wasting valuable funds on “forums” and beurocracty. There should be service allowances for all and (using power as an example) if you use over that you should be responsible for the generation of surplus. And yes that includes residential. If you consume more than what is deemed appropriate - well you should have the burden of installing a PV system or pay a higher rate for that consumption. If you run a mine and you eat power - you install the infrastructure with direct consultation with the network owner. If individuals were made more accountable for their actions (over the majority sharing the responsibility) I bet we’d all turn those lights off and get rid of that third TV.

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:36am | 28/07/10

      @ Phil

      An international agreement is inevitable - whether its the type we want or not.  The longer we wait until an agreement is struck, the greater the emissions cuts need to be, and the greater the cost to transition to a low carbon economy.  Dragging our heels will cost this country money, Phil.

    • Phil says:

      01:29pm | 28/07/10

      Dan the man. You didnt answer the point made or do you agree that a simply system of user pays is the go. No exeptioms

    • DD Ball says:

      09:13am | 28/07/10

      Gillard is working to a plan. It is a negative one because the ALP have been so bad in office they have nothing worthwhile to point to with pride. Gillard intends to attack any policy of the Liberal party. She will allow her supporters to use any argument, and any policy of the ALP will limit those arguments, hence she releases no plan, no policy. She cannot even say when her much vaunted tax cut for companies will eventuate. We know the ALP have an abysmal history for passing legislation that is nothing like their electoral promises, and for not honoring their pledges. Gillard hopes to become a small target by doing nothing and saying nothing .. and if you don’t do anything you can’t do anything wrong.

      Reply

    • Daniel says:

      09:59am | 28/07/10

      The citizens assembly will be as stacked as a western Sydney ALP branch. Another total joke.

      Reply

    • Julie Coker-Godson says:

      08:35pm | 28/07/10

      Will there be a guillotine and a Madam DeFarge for the sceptics?

    • DocBud says:

      12:22am | 29/07/10

      And one of those sceptics might say as they are transported to the gillardtine by tumbril (with aplogies to Charles):

      “I see Rudd, and Gillard, Nutty Bob, The Vengeance, the Juryman, the Judge, long ranks of the new oppressors who have risen on the destruction of the old, perishing by this retributive instrument, before it shall cease out of its present use. I see a beautiful city and a brilliant people rising from this abyss, and, in their struggles to be truly free, in their triumphs and defeats, through long long to come, I see the evil of this time and of the previous time of which this is the natural birth, gradually making expiation for itself and wearing out.

      I see the lives for which I lay down my life, peaceful, useful, prosperous and happy, in that Australia which I shall see no more. I see an abundance of energy, gas guzzling cars that are a pleasure to drive, airconditioned offices, appliances on standby and joyous holidays reached by airplane.”

    • BMJ says:

      10:22am | 28/07/10

      The problem with this whole issue is very simple. People are “concerned” about global warming but when they find out that addressing it involves financial pain of some sort it this concern gets blocked out.

      Emissions cannot be cut by signing an agreement. You must make polluting painful for the hip pocket so the whole market moves to greener solutions.

      Reply

    • Dash says:

      10:23am | 28/07/10

      This is yet another 2020 summit! And ask yourself what it is that Labor delivered from that summit? That’s right, nothing! Yet another hollow promise from this joke of a government. Talk is cheap and lies are expensive!

      Reply

    • Mark Gibson says:

      10:31am | 28/07/10

      Get it through your head, both major parties have abandoned the climate change myth because the people simply don’t believe the rubbish sprouted by the alarmists any more and will not vote to wreck their economy & well-being. If there was anywhere near the 70% consensus you talk about then either or both parties would be onto it like a seagull on a chip! 70% is a myth, just like AGW.

      As soon as people realised the cost of this nonsense, all support dissappeared. It will simply be delayed further and further until it’s forgotten. This “Citizens Assembly” is simply another delaying tactic like the 2020 summit.

      It won’t happen now, it won’t happen later, it’s dead.

      Reply

    • Charles says:

      10:31am | 28/07/10

      $ 1 billion for renewable energy programmes is a laugh, it is merely the electricity user subsidising rent-seeking Big Business to further plunder the pockets of long suffering voters.

      Wind and solar mitigate a pitifully small amount of CO2 (wind none, and solar miniscule), and in the case of solar is usually just a case of those who can afford solar panels and photovoltaic cells passing the cost of their electricity onto those who can’t, the poor, low paid and pensioners in the main.

      It would be hard to devise a more stupid and pointless piece of public policy, but the ALP has managed to achieve this, and now the author of this article thinks this is a good thing.

      Reply

    • Barry says:

      10:35am | 28/07/10

      Assume, for a moment, that enhanced greenhouse will alter Earth’s climate and the net balance will be bad. There are two choices of action:

      You could try mitigation but by any realistic analysis that ship sailed decades ago. China and India will double their coal use over the next 20 years and global annual consumption is expected to rise from the current 6.7billion tons to 10billion at that time. Nor will Indonesia and Brazil leave their people in undeveloped poverty and rightly so. Regardless of Western actions atmospheric carbon dioxide levels will continue to rise throughout this century because people have no choice but to use carbon-dense fuels as the only realistic means of powering their development.

      Alternatively you can go with adaptation and a no-regrets policy. This means maximizing reliable, affordable baseload power and generating wealth to underwrite expansion and hardening of infrastructure to cope with any adverse events experienced. This is what will be done because politicians can not hope to be elected on a platform of falling living standards and energy rationing.

      Stop fussing about climate mitigation, it is not going to happen. Get on with preparing for anything which might happen and that means more baseload generating capacity and more infrastructure development.

      Reply

    • DocBud says:

      11:04am | 28/07/10

      I do so love Arts students talking about “established scientific fact”. (My son is an engineering post-grad at UQ and he neither believes in your scientific facts nor wants the government to take action to protect his future.)

      What Julia Gillard knows is that your statement that “It’s reasonable to say that having established that the earth is heating up, the Australian public is looking to their leaders to try and stop the process before the consequences are too great” is wrong when it comes to people paying for such action.

      The 2010 Lowy poll shows a significant decline (to under 50%) in those who believe urgent action is necessary and more than 50% are either not prepared to pay any extra on the electricity bills or no more than $120 per year.

      People may say they want action, they just don’t want to do it themselves or pay for it. The One Million Women Campaign after more than one year and all the launch momentum sits on 24896. It’s added 6 since yesterday, at that rate we’ll have all supposedly fried before they hit the one million.

      VirginBlue has 0.5% of its passengers offset their flights even though it is only a couple of dollars for most flights. Here in Queensland, in the first six months of the voluntary scheme to offset car emissions by paying an extra $59 at rego, 230 people took up the offer (yes, you’re right, nobody in my family was one of them).

      I’m all for the voluntary way of doing things, the sanctimonious show their hypocrisy and it costs me nothing.

      Reply

    • Reg says:

      07:00pm | 28/07/10

      I’m afraid “belief” has become the controlling factor DocBud. As with religion and politics the believers wax and wane hoping it will all go away. I am more concerned at the dreadful prospects of aging depicted in the cartoon of Tony. His growing old is going to be hoary uncomfortable unless we are mercifully stricken from above. Ever one to find something good in the unfortunate.

    • SkepDad says:

      11:14am | 28/07/10

      I presume we will soon be getting a citizen’s assembly on internet filtering and activity logging?

      Reply

    • Realist says:

      11:22am | 28/07/10

      So is CO2 a pollutant?  Well stop breathing!  Your corpse however would emit methane on breaking down, is 6 times worse so you can’t do that either! 

      When has CO2 been higher than now?  Many times before without our help, and the world didn’t blow up.

      Reply

    • All says:

      05:15pm | 28/07/10

      Historically the times of plenty, peace, arts and development have been in periods of global warming. Corals flourished in the warm waters and all was well with the world. Periods of cooling presented hardship, famine, wars, artistic and development stagnancy. Think I will stick to the pleasant times of natural cycle warming as I don,t want my children and grand children to experience times of war and famine as the haves and have nots fight over the dwindling food and resources.

    • Frank says:

      11:28am | 28/07/10

      Lets hold a summit on how to rid this country of the ALP smile

      Reply

    • Mandy says:

      11:53am | 28/07/10

      I agree. We achieved consensus on climate change long ago. Everyone wants real action on it. And now! I’m surprised at Julia actually - where’s the ‘full steam ahead’ approach she applied to sewing up the mining tax debarcle? What’s this ‘softly, softly’ consensus crap?!??

      Reply

    • DocBud says:

      12:26pm | 28/07/10

      “Everyone wants real action on it.” I could find you a 100 people among my family, friends and colleagues without any effort who don’t want any form of action so less of the everyone.

      Where did the consensus come from, we weren’t asked? The Lowy poll seems to suggest that there is no general agreement on the need for urgent action or on how much people are prepared to pay:

      http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2010/05/31/lowy-poll-climate-change-and-public-hypocrisy/

    • Barry says:

      12:34pm | 28/07/10

      Uh, Mandy? I think that should read “debacle” but never mind. Could you tell us how Julia “sewed up the mining tax”? Don’t know if you’ve noticed but small and mid-cap miners have reopened a hostile advertising campaign and current projections of iron ore prices suggest the big three may not be liable for any MRRT. Looks more like a stitch up to me.

      And as far as “everyone wants real action on [AGW / climate change / global warming / today’s alarmist nomenclature]” I realise I’m not everyone but I for sure do NOT want anyone attempting to adjust the global thermostat or make my energy more expensive. As for why, see my comment above (09:35am | 28/07/10).

      Not useful. Not wanted. Not in my name. Clear enough for you?

    • Shelly says:

      02:31pm | 28/07/10

      Did we? I must have missed that. What was the outcome? Did we agree to limit temperature increases to 1 degree or 2? The hubris of those who suggest that man can control the climate is staggering.

    • Reg says:

      12:56am | 29/07/10

      See if I can recall the figures correctly. 36,000 years ago the continent of Europe froze solid in one year and stayed that way for 1800 years or something like that. Unaware of what the starting temperature was, it is still possible that the rate of drop could have been one degree a WEEK. It is directly possible that a welling up of magma along the Atlantic trough caused the warm currents to be deflected towards Africa inducing dreadfully dry and rain leeched real-estate. There is also every reason to dread the building of the “new Himalayas” along the Indonesian eruption zones. So let’s grab the mining tax now, before it all evaporates because we’ll need it to accommodate the displaced Indonesians and especially the East Timorese. And in case you want to dismiss this scenario as well, remember that Indonesia has the same population numbers as the US, more or less.

    • WayneT says:

      02:10pm | 28/07/10

      It amazes me that we have all these debates about bringing in a Carbon Tax when there hasn’t been any kind of rigorous debate about the validity of Anthropogenic influence on global warming.  It’s gone from Anthropogenic Global Warming to Climate Change, because its harder to argue against the climate changing which has been happening since the birth of the planet - very clever.  And just a little scientific snippet - Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant, it is produced in nature in vast quantities.  Natural carbon dioxide makes up only 0.0387% of all trace gases in the atmosphere.  And of that figure, human produced CO2 makes up about 0.0012%.  That’s equivalent to about 3% of all Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere.  And of the total CO2 produced in the atmosphere, the Earth re-absorbs about 94 to 96 per cent.  The actual biggest contributor to the greenhouse effect is water vapor.  Shouldn’t we declare water a pollutant and set a price on this instead?  Lets actually sit down and argue the science first and get some real consensus amongst the voting public, then we can sit down and agree or disagree on a Carbon Tax with all the actual facts laid out for all to see with a better informed public.  You have to ask why the politicians aren’t willing to do this.

      Reply

    • Daryl says:

      02:40pm | 28/07/10

      Sorry I’m a bit slow, but isn’t the government meant to be the “people’s assembly”? Even when there may be a hard decision to make! Or is this a bit like an “independant tax review” where you ask the expert to do a root and branch review (excluding PAYG and GST of course), come up with what you want and then dress it up as having nothing to do with you. Is it just me or is there a pattern developing here? What are we actually paying our pollies to do? “I know, lets form an assembly”. “Power prices rise? Nothing to do with the government, blame the assembly” “Cost of living up? Nothing to do with the government, blame the assembly” What a JOKE!

      Reply

    • Reg says:

      07:09pm | 28/07/10

      Don’t be naive Daryl,  ...whoopee a legit use of the Liberal’s eye bulging trigger, .... “When in doubt, form a committee.” John Howard taught us that. Remember the Wheat Board? No need to apologise for being a bit slow, Daryl, John expected that of everyone.

    • Jason says:

      03:30pm | 28/07/10

      You are confusing scientific fact with the output of flawed computer modelling.  They are not the same thing and climate change cannot be made fact without experimental proof… the predictions have not correlated with actual measurements yet.

      The mechanism of science is theory based on observation and science advances by experimentally proving/disproving theories, or coming up with better ones.  Global warming theory has been well refuted in many publications by highly respected scientists (not reported by MSM), AND by the actual evidence - thus by definition it is not scientific fact.

      Reply

    • B says:

      02:30am | 29/07/10

      Just a nitpick. “Catastrophic Global Warming” has been widely refuted. Global warming is real and CO2 will warm the atmosphere. However, due to negative feedback loops throughout nature, it shouldn’t hit statistical significance before we run out of oil and coal. It will almost certainly be too small to kill anyone.

      We have to watch our wording, lest we be taken for those with only a sophmoric understanding of thermodynamics saying that the greenhouse effect doesn’t exist.

    • Amber says:

      06:02pm | 28/07/10

      The irony is that if Howard was still in power we would almost certainly have something in place by now.

      Reply

    • Reg says:

      01:10am | 29/07/10

      Dream on. The only time JH ever got his arse into gear was when he went for a walk or was beating up the workers. Nothing ironic about that, it was a expected of him.

    • Against the Man says:

      06:18pm | 28/07/10

      Even labor supporters are saying this citizen’s assembly idea is terrible. Wikileaks do your stuff and tell me more the real Julia.

      Reply
 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:10PM

RT @JenBrockie: A take on social media from India http://t.co/5XCerDTB @tehelkadotcom

Lucy Kippist

lucyjk 07 Feb 12 09:08PM

RT @alaindebotton: So many of our problems would be alleviated if we had 3 or 4 exceptional friends living within a 2 minute radius.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 07 Feb 12 07:22PM

RT @latikambourke: Yes, @PeterSlipperMP is genuine.

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 07 Feb 12 06:41PM

It's terribly unfashionable to admit but my Cityrail train just left on time again

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

by Tory Shepherd

66

Interest rate barney barely even rates as interesting

Stop all the cheering, cut off the champagne. Prevent the pollies from barking and silence the drums.…

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

by Tory Maguire

71

Life slips away while you’re filming it on your phone

Some friends of mine had lunch on Saturday with a mate who spent so much time artfully composing photos…

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

by Anthony Sharwood

34

Other stuff to be angry about today (with chorizo pic)

That dopey Spaniard. Three-time Tour de France winner Alberto Contador has been banned for two years,…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: City vs country: What would you change your life for?

Dieter Moeckel says:

We made the tree change from Darwin to Wonbah more than 15 years ago. After fencing, a road, and couple of dams our money was gone. Super is enough to live comfortably. We have geese growing old and stringy the only one that made it to the pot committed Kamakazi by flying into a tree; the chooks are… [read more]

From: I’d rather have a piece of toast than listen to crap lyrics

Erick says:

Led Zeppelin are responsible for my all-time favourite mixed metaphor: "There you sit, sit and stare, like a book on a shelf rusting." (Misty Mountain Hop) I laugh every time I hear it. Hmmm, I believe I've decided what to play on the way to work today. [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops

Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more

150 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed