A letter to Mr.Rudd

Mr.Rudd,


Firstly, I'm grateful that you have enable such a method of communicating (somewhat) directly with you, and that I am able to do so. Such approachability is a welcome thing.


Next, as we are entering into the last year of your first term in office, I would like to congratulate you (somewhat belatedly) on attaining office. After 21 years as a voter, you are the first politician I have vote for as opposed to "against".


Your early actions in office made me proud of that choice; the apology to indigenous Australians; the ratification of the Kyoto protocols; the commitments to education, and; the restructuring of the hospital system - particularly in rural areas (though I continue to be irritated by the use of my local hospital as the battleground that brought that last about, but that is another topic entirely).


And I am pleased with the character of most of the members of your front bench.


Given that, it pains me to admit to some areas of concern that have me questioning the wisdom of my vote - or it would were it not for your opponents at the time.


Over the length of your government's term thus far though, I have been concerned at some of the stances, responses taken and policies put forth (in some instances greatly, in others only mildly surprised or disappointed). All of which potentially negatively impact on us on an individual, societal scale and have an impact on our economic viability and international standing - now and into the future.


I have been mildly disappointed at the backsliding regarding the issues of the environment and the continued scapegoating of developing nations as justification for our own nation dragging its feet. The strength of purpose and commitment evident at the ratification of the Kyoto Protocols has all but vanished, to the point all I hear are industry apologists and economic (ir)rationalists.


I have been disappointed (but not surprised) by the lack of progress towards improving (let alone federalising) our hospital system. Similarly, I am not surprised at how little progress has been made towards establishing a national curriculum, and though more funds have been injected into education, it falls far short of being either sufficient or appropriately directed. And while I was very disappointed at the refusal of our government to permit gay marriage, sadly I can't say I was surprised.


These areas disappoint me for the were a large part the reason I chose to give you my vote.


There are however, two additional areas in which your government, and by extention and at time specifically you, have disappointed, surprised and appalled me.


The first is the stance taken in regard to refugees and asylum seekers. The actions taken and words spoken by yourself and your front bench have been as bad (in my view) as those taken by the previous government. Perhaps worse because they come from a party that makes many claims about morality and social justice. To continue to use people in such straits as "fear levers" for the populace, to continue to quarantine them on Christmas Island, to continue to overstate the numbers of those seeking refuge here and understate how far below our U.N agreement those numbers are does a great diservice to our nation.


Similarly, the overwhelming eagerness with which our government representatives leaps to deny claims of any racism in Australia (for example: the way we are percieved in India at present, the blackface skit and KFC ad on TV), rather than actually address the issues highlighted doesn't do much to let the rest of the world know that we are not a nation of Pauline Hansons.


The second is that of the proposed ISP ban. Much like the previous issue, this disturbs and appalls me on many levels. The conflation of restricted content with illegal content is disingenuous at best - manipulative spin-doctoring and wilful concealment of facts (and other agendum at the most paranoid) at worst. Likewise the language used which joins disapproval of the proposed ban as being in support of child pornography and/or terrorism. That is patronising fear-mongering even in its lightest guise, and extremely offensive to those who oppose it as well. At its most extreme, it is a form of social engineering that is near Orwellian in concept and execution.


Let me say this straight out - I am vehemently opposed to child pornography and harm that might be done to our children.


I do not, however, consider this proposed ISP blocking, "cyber-safety" initiative to be an effective or appropriate approach to policing or preventing such abuses of our children.


Further, it is an overly heavy handed intrusion into the private lives and civil and human rights of our citizens. It is personal and intellectual censorship and an unwarranted intrusion into our homes and lives. It demonstrates an extreme disregard and lack of confidence in the abilities of parents to appropriately guage or decide what is right for themselves or their children - and at the same time allows those who would abuse children or support terroism underground where they are harder to trace.


Regarding the selection of sites to be blocked at the ISP level, the process is eggregiously flawed. As previously mentioned, "Refused Classification" is not an indication of legality, nor is it in and of itself a bar to ownership of material that is RC. That addition to the list comes primarily as a result of complaint or offense rather than on the basis of illegality is a disturbing matter. By such standards, homosexuality would still be illegal in Tasmania (as an example).


This ban, in addition to being ineffective (and erroneously advertised by Mr.Conroy) for the purposes it is supposedly intended, also restricts freedom of access to information and freedom of expression (both intellectual and personal). It makes it possible for "morality laws" to move from the public sphere to the private.


This is not the stuff on which a "knowledge nation" or nation of the future is built upon - let alone that of one which supports human rights.


The current government is an improvement on the one which preceded it, as you are as a leader, but, unlike the first year of office, only very marginally. It is my hope that you and your government will demonstrate a change and improvement in the areas of concern I have listed.


It is not, unfortunately, my expectation.


Sincerely,


*Me*