Archive for September, 2012

Date: September 20th, 2012
Cate: Jerk of the Week, Politics
1 msg

Jerk of the week: Cory Bernardi

Now seems as good a time as any to revive Jerk of the Week. The funny thing is that I was considering doing it earlier in the week when former rower, come Senator and Liberal Party heavy weight, Cory Bernardi linked violent protests in Sydney to multiculturalism. (full comments available here)

Compare and contrast his racist and ignorant comments to the nuanced and thoughtful comments of Waleed Aly (it’s ironic that a conservative like Aly has become such a darling of the left, but I feel that says more about Australian political spectrum than anything else). The problem with most things that come out of Bernardi’s mouth is that they are just so fucking dumb that it’s hard to know where to start.

… but before I had a chance to start, he came out with this beauty:

The time has come to ask, when will it end? If we are prepared to redefine marriage … what is the next step?

The next step … is having three people that love each other should be able to enter into a permanent union endorsed by society, or four people. There are even some creepy people out there, who say that it’s OK to have consensual sexual relations between humans and animals. Will that be a future step?

(full comments here)

I don’t think I really need to say anything else on the matter do I? It’s pretty hard to overlook him for the title of Jerk of the Week especially as he is unrepentant even after being sacked as shadow parliamentary secretary to Tony Abbott.

What I will say is that it is heteronormative and homophobic to deny Australians in same sex relationship the right to Marriage and I think we need to start calling saying that it is homophobic. It is necessarily saying that their relationship is less valuable than the relationship of a hetrosexual couple and that is discrimination, plain and simple. How a large majority of MPs and Senators in Parliament can vote as they have is of deep concern. Who votes for these people anyway! (Increasingly I think I oppose compulsory voting but we’ll save that for another time)

So for epitomising the racial, religious and sexual intolerance that should have been well and truly stamped out a long time ago and has no roll in our society, let alone the houses of parliament, you Cory Bernardi, are: Jerk of the Week!

He’s in London at the moment, so perhaps I’ll go and award him the prize myself.

Date: September 1st, 2012
Cate: Politics

Privacy and the presumption of innocence

Australian Attorney-General, Nicola Roxon, has released a discussion paper on potential reforms of National Security Legislation. One of the proposals up for discussion is the retention of telecommunications data for two years.

It’s a proposal that has been pushed by law enforcement and intelligence agencies around the world for a while now. There have been similar proposals here in the UK, other EU countries and the US.

Meanwhile, in Minneapolis and other places, law enforcement agencies are scanning licence plates using infrared and storing the data from these scans for up to a year to help with investigations into a range of criminal offences. You can listen to On the Media‘s podcast about it which I highly recommend.

(While we’re on podcasts, I’d also highly recommend Stilgherrian’s Patch Monday which dealt with the data retention issue recently and where privacy concerns are a regular topic.)

This licence plate data is also being shared with insurance companies which is consistent with the alarming growth in the flow of potentially sensitive information from Government to Business which, amongst other things, are far less accountable.

Privacy has limits. If you are being investigated for criminal offences, then it is reasonable that law enforcement get permission (ie a warrant) to investigate you. So I would be less concerned about the retention of telecommunications data or licence plate scans if it was only the data pertaining to a criminal investigation that was being retained. But it’s not, it’s every bit of data.

Which brings me to Victoria’s acting Privacy Commissioner, Anthony Bendall‘s, response to the data retention proposal:

Not only does this completely remove the presumption of innocence, which all persons are afforded, it goes against one of the essential dimensions of human rights and privacy law: freedom from surveillance and arbitrary intrusions into a person’s life.

The presumption of innocence is pretty fundamental, I’m sure you agree and yet another reason to remain vigilante about privacy.