How Australia Surrendered to the Wowsers

Regulating themselves to death

Flannery at 12 o’clock

Today is ANZAC Day in Australia and New Zealand. It seems an appropriate time to reflect on what Australia was and what it has become. (Sorry Kiwis: can’t comment on you this time, though I wish I could. Please forgive me for not coming this time – especially you, Josie Jackson, my Official Biographer and Kiwi wunderkind.)

I said the other day what a marvellous achievement it was, the way those early generations of Aussies turned a relentless hell into a fair approximation of paradise on earth. What I see now, however, is a fair proportion of the current generation doing their damnedest to reverse the process.

You can’t move a car to a different state without having to submit it to about A$400 worth of checks to make sure it’s roadworthy. You can’t run a fishing boat without having about 12 different permits. You can’t light a barbie pretty much anywhere unless you have at least two fire crews on hand with no less than 3,000 gallons of water, plus a doctorate in health and safety with regards to preparation of raw-meat products. You can’t kill a crocodile even though their populations are expanding so fast they’ll soon be overtaking humans. You can’t study at “Uni” without doing a mandatory course module explaining what you’re studying from the point of view of the “Traditional Owners” – (the people formerly known as Aborigines). You can’t earn a living as a fruit farmer in the Murray Darling basin because a bunch of Eco Fascists from the WWF say you can’t. You can’t open a mine without being told that what you’re doing is theft because, like, man, natural resources belong to everyone. You can’t chop down the trees on your land because they’re a “carbon sink” now, fulfilling Australia’s obligations under the Kyoto protocol to deal with the non-existent problem of CO2 (a plant food). You can’t have a thriving economy because that might discriminate against all the lazy bastards who don’t want to work so what you have to do is shackle it and hobble it with a mining tax and a carbon tax in order to redistribute wealth in the guise of “saving the planet.” I could go on. (Our own Ozboy has some further trenchant views on this subject)

I’ve been to Gallipoli. I have an idea what your ancestors went through in 1915. They did not give up their lives and limbs in order that you might surrender a century on to a bunch of wowsers.

Related posts:

  1. Freedom of speech is dead in Australia
  2. Australia’s green orchidectomy*
  3. Australia counts the cost of environmental lunacy – and plots its sweet revenge
  4. Australia shows us all the way by sacking its useless, pointless Climate Commissioner Tim Flannery

5 thoughts on “How Australia surrendered to the wowsers”

  1. Bern Pero9 says:27th April 2012 at 12:35 amLooks like your research for this article was done by the writers of the YOUNG ONES ! Load of flippant crap !
  2. vapourised says:27th April 2012 at 4:02 pmwithout even hearing your voice – just reading the style – you come across as a precious little camp twat with a massive “look at me” complex. For the sake of a lack of spitoons please crawl back into the cupboard.
  3. Fkyw says:28th April 2012 at 1:30 amHeard you for the first time yesterday on radio in Melbourne – couldn’t help passing you off as a total whack job. Total waste of time.
  4. Aussiesue26 says:29th April 2012 at 3:39 amI saw you James on The Bold Report today (29/4/2012), and I said about time someone like you came forward and exposed all these money grabbing liers about global warming. I never believed it in the first time I heard about it, afterall living in Australia we always have droughts, floods, heat, cold and anything else mother nature throws our way, been happening since the world began.
  5. ThanksJames says:1st May 2012 at 11:29 amLooks like you’ve offended some of the precious little ABC toadies below. Keep at it James. The Left in Australia is going down the gurgler, so they’re hypersensitive at the moment. Sorry the ABC couldn’t be fair with their interviewing. They only want to hear one line and nothing else. What possessed you to go into the lion’s den like that? You did well under extremely trying circumstances. Thanks for visiting, many of us are grateful you have taken time to come here.

Comments are closed.

Why I owe Aussie QC Raymond Finkelstein a pint | James Delingpole

March 5, 2012

Gratuitous saltwater crocodile picture

Today’s column is dedicated to Raymond Finkelstein QC. Raymond who? Well, he’s the kind of left-leaning activist lawyer I’d normally run a mile from – especially since he’s behind a scary new report which, if implemented, will kill what’s left of freedom of speech in Australia and pretty much criminalise climate scepticism. (H/T John O’Sullivan; Peter Dun)

But as far as I’m concerned, the man’s a total bloody hero and when I come to Oz in mid-April I’d like to buy him a pint. Why? Because thanks to good old Raymond I’m going to sell loads more copies of my book Killing The Earth To Save It: How Environmentalists are Ruining the Planet, Destroying the Economy and Stealing Your Jobs (Connor Court).

Raymond – or Pinkie Finkie, as I’m sure he’d preferred it if I called him, because the Aussies do love a bit of informality, don’t they? – has produced a report on media regulation in Australia so terrifyingly authoritarian it makes the Leveson Enquiry look like a model of balance, sanity and restraint. (According to Mark Steyn – via Jo Nova – the Chinese have been eyeing Pinkie Finkie’s report with gobsmacked admiration, wondering whether they could ever get away with producing something quite so extreme…)

You can read the full 400 pages here, if you’re feeling masochistic. But Australian Climate Madness has a pretty good summary of the key issues of concern, starting with Pinkie Finkie’s proposal to create a new super-regulator called the News Media Council [missed a trick there, didn’t he? surely Ministry of Truth would have been more appropriate] which will impose its idea of fairness and balance not only on newspapers but even on blogs with as few hits as 15,000 a year.

But whose idea of fairness and balance?

It’s an astonishing fact that of the 10600 submissions received by the inquiry no fewer than 9600 were boilerplate submissions from left-wing pressure groups, led by Avaaz “a global civic organization launched in January 2007 that promotes activism on issues such as climate change, human rights, poverty and corruption.” (See Andrew Bolt for further details)

This bias is certainly evident in its attitude to climate change. It cites a December 2011 report by the left-leaning Australian Centre for Independent Journalism on media coverage of climate change policy in Australia. The report – A Sceptical Climate – had found that “negative coverage of government policy outweighed positive coverage by 73 per cent to 27 per cent” and that the preponderance of negative coverage was even greater among Murdoch-owned newspapers.

To which the only sane and sensible response is: “Yeah? And???” Of course a left-wing think tank is going to find climate scepticism objectionable. Of course it’s going to seize every opportunity to have a dig at papers owned by Rupert Murdoch. But had Pinkie Finkie been wearing his scrupulously neutral wig of blind justice – rather than his I HEART George Soros hat – it might have occurred to him that there was a much more plausible reason than media bias as to why the Gillard Government’s carbon tax got such generally negative coverage.

Maybe the carbon tax was just a bloody stupid idea and everyone with an ounce of sense could SEE it was a bloody stupid idea!

Pinkie Finkie, however, takes the view that any newspaper that takes a firm line against an iniquitous, wrong-headed, economically suicidal, unscientifically-based, activist-driven, morally bankrupt new carbon tax system must perforce be in need of stricter regulation.

4.38 However, to have an opinion and campaign for it is one thing; reporting is another, and in news reporting it is expected by the public, as well as by professional journalists, that the coverage will be fair and accurate.

4.39 Nonetheless, there is a widely-held public view that, despite industry-developed codes of practice that state this, the reporting of news is not fair, accurate and balanced.

“Widely-held public view”. Yes, well I suppose it really is “widely-held” if you ignore the fact that 86 per cent of those submissions were the result of leftist astroturfing, much of it – not unlike the Leveson Inquiry – motivated mainly by a desire to get Murdoch.

(Lest you doubt it, here’s what Avaaz said to its mob: (H/T Andrew Bolt)

The media inquiry we fought hard to win is under threat — Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers are working to discredit and limit the investigation into his stranglehold on our media. But a flood of public comments from each of us will set an ambitious agenda and save the inquiry.)

Anyway, you get the idea. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes, and all that. We’ve saw in the Andrew Bolt aborigines case that freedom of speech in Australia was already on its last legs, thanks to the way the system has been hijacked by activist judges. If Finkelstein gets his way, this could be the final nail in the coffin.

I personally don’t think it will be. I think the Carbon Tax, the Bolt trial and now this are going to lead to the mother of all political backlashes, and that when it comes to the next general election the avowedly climate sceptical Tony Abbott is going to be a shoo-in.

But let’s allow lefties like Pinkie Finkie and Gillard and Tim Flannery and Bob Brown their hour in the sun because the longer they stay there, the more damage they do and the more damage they will be seen to have done. This is important. (The same applies to Obama’s US; sadly it’s not going to work here, not with Cameron poisoning the wells for Conservatism for ever). If Australia is to get the government it needs (and deserves) it must first experience the full horror of the government it doesn’t deserve. The more easily ordinary people can see just how authoritarian, petty-minded, bullying, meddling and grotesquely biased the left can be when it holds the reins of power, the more enthusiastic they’ll be about throwing the bastards into the croc pit come 2013. (Or sooner, if we’re lucky.)

Related posts:

  1. Climategate: five Aussie MPs lead the way by resigning in disgust over carbon tax
  2. Aussie sceptics destroy EU carbon commissioner
  3. Global warming: red-faced climatologist issues grovelling apology
  4. Julian Assange is not a Climategate hero

3 thoughts on “Why I owe Aussie QC Raymond Finkelstein a pint”

  1. Nige Cook says:5th March 2012 at 10:15 pmJames, let me explain: anyone who points out the fact that the emperor’s clothes are threadbare is a menace to freedom of speech and needs to be muzzled. Freedom of speech cannot work in a dictatorship of lefties. You should know that, having seen the struggles good olf Brezhnev had to muzzle dissidents.

    There is nothing illogical for a lying dogmatic orthodoxy to suppress freedom of speech when it disproves the lies. Quite the contrary, it would be criminally insane for them not to try to ban the facts. Fortunately, in England there is no need for a law to be passed by Parliament here, banning a scientific journal’s peer reviewers from permitting publication of facts. They’re sufficiently corrupt that it’s simply not needed. Oz is different…

  2. Finbar says:8th March 2012 at 11:27 pmNow that you’re all sweary, may I call you an obnoxious cunt?
  3. Openwifi says:9th March 2012 at 3:25 pmThis is a bit of a shame:

    http://www.delingpolestudio.co.uk/Design_Portfolio/Pages/WWF.html

Comments are closed.