On dual citizens, ETS hot air and the magic of the web
We already have two classes of citizens in our country - those with shared loyalties having dual citizenships and those with only loyalty to Australia.
Only the latter can be elected to the Australian Parliament.
This shared loyalty concept raises interesting questions when someone commits a heinous crime or crimes in Australia.
Australia is a generous country which offers opportunities to people lucky enough to be accepted into Australia as a migrant or refugee.
The position of someone, who retains citizenship of another country and commits a major felony, whilst legally in this country, deserves to be looked at.
The position is simpler when a migrant is here on a visa and not yet a citizen. Take the reported case of Turkish migrant, Mehmet Ince, aged 31 years who migrated to Australia in 1995 and committed 30 crimes in two years, including murdering a Melbourne plumber, Ian Broadbent. His visa was cancelled in 2004. He appealed and this was rejected in 2005.
Why is he still here you might ask? Well he is due to be deported to Turkey as I write. The murdered victim’s mother is relieved; the Minister, thankfully, has refused to intervene to keep him here citing the best interests of Australia as a major reason.
And the murderer’s response was to claim he deserved to stay, answering the anguish of the mother of the murdered man with an insult reportedly claiming that to throw him out will not bring back her dead son and only hurt him (the murderer) and his mother.
Australia is well rid of this murderer but what if he had managed to get dual citizenship prior to his committing 30 crimes, including murder.
Could we have sent him back? Or would we have sent him back?
The answer is we probably would not. But the question remains in this type of case whether we should send him back.
Would he have breached his solemn oath (or affirmation) to abide by the laws of Australia?
I can only see this question arising where there is dual citizenship.
In the light of the most recent Somali terrorist arrests and charges these questions may become very relevant should some, or any, Somali/Australia dual citizen be convicted.
Personally I think we should send them back and this may have the added benefit of preventing any backlash against the particular group they come from as people could see this as justice being done.
The government must demonstrate that there is no place in Australia for someone who has sworn allegiance to Australia but is a jihardi extremist intent on murdering Australian soldiers.
On the web, and the ets:
Thank God for the net.
How else could we get first, awareness and secondly, access to a range of views on the links between the financial markets and climate change. Out there, there is a debate raging.
Those contributing to the debate, like Rolling Stones’ Matt Taibbi, with his “The Great American Bubble Machine” published in July 2009.
Extraordinary stuff but his very lengthy article is compelling if contentious reading. It certainly puts up a convincing argument as to why financial players want a cap and trade scheme wether or not it does anything to improve climate change.
It won’t be a good little earner, it will be a great big earner for the traders.
Taibbi writes: “There will be limits for coal plants, utilities, natural-gas distributors and numerous other industries on the amount of carbon emissions (a.k.a greenhouse gases) they can produce per year. If the companies go over their allotment, they will be able to buy allocations or credits from other companies that have managed to produce fewer emissions.”
The feature of this plan that has special appeal to speculators is that the ‘cap’ on carbon will be continually lowered by the government, which means that carbon credits will become more and more scarce with each passing year. Which means that this is a brand new commodities market where the main commodity to be traded is guaranteed to rise in price over time”.
The volume of this new market will be upwards of a trillion dollars annually, for comparison’s sake, the annual combined revenues of electricity suppliers in the United States total $320 billion.
Out with Collateralised Debt Obligations (CDO’s) and Credit Default Swaps and in with the new trade in carbon derivatives – and all in the name of saving the planet.
At least the Investment Group on Climate Change here in Australia who are lobbying to have the government legislation passed admit their aim is “to protect their individual investors financial future”.
The trade in paper will make sensational profits for traders while costs for the production of one of modern society’s essentials – electricity will rise and be fed into the price we will all have to pay.
Make no mistake, the government’s ETS policy, is bad policy, it will increase the cost of living and decrease wages, for those lucky enough to keep a job. Result, punters worse off, and for what? That’s why we will remain firm on opposing it in the Senate tomorrow.
Read all about it
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
RT @Rob_Stott: Like a lot of Republicans in the US, it's much easier to support gay marriage when you're no longer in a position to do anyt…
The latest and greatest
Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…
I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…
In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…