politics

Fred Pawle: Why Conservatives Should Rejoice

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

Australia just had a disastrous Federal election. The conservative Liberal Party ran a terrible campaign, allowing an incompetent and deceitful Government to be re-elected.

Why Conservatives Should Rejoice

Australia has dodged the bullet of fake conservatism. It is now incumbent on those who can survive Labor’s treacherous incompetence to ensure a decent alternative is offered in 2028.`

Phew. That was close! Had Peter Dutton’s Coalition won this election, we would be staring at three years of fake conservatives appeasing the environmental lobby, imposing new censorship laws, introducing a digital ID and central bank digital currency, ignoring the toxic National School Curriculum and locking us all up every time Anthony Fauci catches a cold.

The Coalition would have combined that with just enough sensible reform to keep both its base and its leftist focus groups onside come the next election. In other words, long-term, robust conservative policies would have been as likely as Albo’s newfound Catholicism preventing him from marching in the next Mardi Gras.

Thank goodness that instead we are staring down three years of unmitigated catastrophe at the hands of the most incompetent, nastiest bunch of politicians Australia has seen. Our contempt for them need not be moderated. Nor will we need to stifle our amusement as they impose arguably the worst agenda of any Australian government in history.

Conservatives who are lamenting that Labor’s divisive, illogical, unpatriotic and economy-destroying performance has been rewarded with another term are forgetting how much fun it is to be in opposition. We are the pirates, the rebels, the discerning minority who warned during this campaign that Labor would destroy the country. And now they will. It’s time to break out the popcorn and await vindication.

I say this with enormous sympathy for those who cannot avoid being victimised by this government. I’ve met farmers, for example, whose properties, which have been in the family for six generations and have provided Australia with both food and exports for more than a century, who will be driven to despair and in some cases bankruptcy and suicide, when Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s high-voltage wires are forcibly suspended above their crops. I won’t bore you with the details, but these wires, delivering electricity from remote windmills and solar operations to the cities, will make the farms unviable and impossible to sell, which is stage one of Bowen’s long-term plan. Stage two is to pick up the land for a song and carpet them with solar panels. Farming is so last century, don’t you know.

Similarly, small business operators who survive on narrow margins, and people with large mortgages and small children will, if they are smart enough to have seen through Labor’s counterproductive, inflation-driving promises of “free” handouts, will be trembling tonight. I feel for them.

Back in January, I compared Donald Trump, who was about to be inaugurated on a mandate of action and optimism, with Albo, who was preparing to embark on a campaign to be re-elected knowing that “most of his supporters hate the place, and think its history consists of nothing but theft and genocide. He knows his only chance in the forthcoming election is if enough voters share his dreary vision of multicultural dystopia, Net Zero deindustrialization, Soviet-style censorship and bloated bureaucracy.”

Nothing that happened during the campaign disabused me of this succinct observation. Albo knew his only chance was not to appeal to patriotism or a sense of mutual responsibility between state and citizen; rather, it was to give away as much money as he could in the key electorates and demographics. Great democratic victories are based on a broad vision that brings people together; Albo won it by promising to pay our doctors’ fees.

Some of Labor’s key demographics make astroturf look like the croquet garden at Windsor Castle. Labor has for decades been flooding the nation with low-skill workers who are dumb and nihilistic enough to vote for the party that obsequiously buys their affection, and Albo’s government has put the strategy on steroids.

The flip side of this arrangement for the MPs is that they need to wear strange costumes every time Ramadan, Diwali, Chinese New Year and the ancient Feast of the Non-Binary Mountain Goat rolls around. Let them. They know they look ridiculous.

We will retain our own culture, thanks very much, in which the only early-morning call to prayer is for the Dawn Service on April 25, and the only traditional greeting is a heartfelt “g’day” followed by “have a good one”.

Either deliberately or through its monumental incompetence, Labor is going to impose enormous suffering on Australians. Conservative commentators won’t be exempt. We’ve already seen in Britain and Germany what happens to people who upset the leftist agenda. Tommy Robinson and Lucy Connolly are the most famous, but in fact Pommy plods are arresting 30 people a day for wrongspeak. It will happen here too when the government reintroduces the Misinformation and Disinformation Bill, which empowers apparatchiks to define the truth. Albo and his colleagues are authoritarian losers who know they can’t win an argument, so must resort to blunter methods to retain power.

Nigel Farrage has just proved that even this isn’t foolproof. His Reform Party, which evolved from the Brexit Party in 2021, is now the most popular party in Britain. In a by-election last week it destroyed the incumbent Labor while also taking out 10 local councils. Farrage has called it the death of two-party politics. British Labour backbenchers are already sharpening the knives for their evil leader, Keir Starmer.

Albo is taking us down the same road travelled by his hero Starmer, unaware that a humiliating Farrage-like backlash will ensue.

This term of federal government will inspire patriotic Australians in ways Peter Dutton, let alone Labor, never thought possible.

The European Rebellion Against Net Zero

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

Jo Nova writes on The Aussie Wire:

The European rebellion against the Sacred Quest for NetZero spreads — Green investors “shocked”

 26 OCTOBER 2023

Joanne NovaBY JOANNE NOVA
The European rebellion against the Sacred Quest for NetZero spreads — Green investors “shocked”
Spread the love
Fantasy NetZero

Turtle Castle image by SAIF 4

The following post on the topic of NetZero is syndicated from jonova.com.au

Rishi Sunak’s delay in the NetZero Quest was the crack in the Uniparty Wall

Thanks to NetZeroWatch

It threatens to ignite a climate election.  It matters, because now, suddenly, one party can point out the absurdities and the costs. They can be an Opposition, and mock the sacred cows. That doesn’t mean Sunak will do that, but the fork in the road has opened, the world is watching — and his party is suddenly up four points.

The Green funds cartel is “in shock” sayth Bloomberg, at the Sunak shift — so it must be pretty serious.  Green investors are using the words “dismay” and “bewilderment”, which they almost never use. Green investment relies almost entirely on crowd psychology and government subsidies, so normally bad news is padded and fluffed so it doesn’t look so bad. We wouldn’t want to lose momentum would we? Boy are they losing momentum.

Meanwhile Sweden has not only cut climate money a bit, it’s unshackled some taxes off fossil fuels as well, leaving the centre left apoplectic and threatening to move motions of no-confidence. It is unthinkable, apparently, but Sweden might even increase emissions.

Germany has suspended draconian building efficiency standards and stepped back from their full gas boiler ban. They had wanted to ban all new “fossil” heaters from 2024, but after fierce protests, have instead brought in a much diluted and delayed version due to be adopted in 2028.  President Emmanuel Macron must have been watching the German and British debacles. His new plan rules out a complete ban on gas boilers, and talks about protecting vulnerable people in rural areas, and even how the French love their cars.

What’s more scary than climate change? —  The rise of the far-right

The quote of the day is from a German politician who sums up the major driver of these policy shifts.

Earlier this month, German Finance Minister Christian Lindner told Politico that stricter energy efficiency rules for buildings could fuel the rise of the far-right, amid growing apathy across Europe over plans to reach net zero.

— CleanEnergyWire

So Climate Change might cause the sixth mass extinction of life on Earth, but nothing is more frightening than the possibility of the far-left losing power at elections.*

Polls have leapt for the conservative government in the UK since Rishi Sunak slowed the NetZero train

This is what all the Climate-believer politicians are afraid of. Deep down, they know the NetZero quest is not popular with the masses, even though they say it is all the time. If they thought climate policies were really winners with the workers, they wouldn’t be so afraid of their opponents catching the skeptical train would they? Instead, they are aghast when their opponents dare suggest other priorities might be higher than changing the weather.

Read the full article here

Ten Reasons All Australians Can Rejoice at the Voice Referendum Result

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

From The Daily Declaration:

The Daily Declaration
referendum result

Ten Reasons All Australians Can Rejoice at the Voice Referendum Result

The Yes campaign and the corporate media might be in mourning, but in truth, the referendum result is a win for all Australians. Here’s why.

The result of the weekend’s referendum was known within an hour or so of polls closing. Australians emphatically voted against constitutionally enshrining an Indigenous Voice to Parliament.

Nationally, just 39.3 per cent affirmed the proposition, while a whopping 60.7 per cent made known their disapproval. Every state rejected it, along with the Northern Territory, home to the highest proportion of Indigenous residents in the nation.

The result was as definitive as the opinion polls had suggested. Once postal votes are accounted for, the No vote will likely swell some more.

The referendum debate subjected Australians to months of bickering and division. With some campaigners cynically framing the debate as a de facto empathy test or a vote on the value of Indigenous lives, the referendum took an especially heavy toll on many Aboriginal Australians.

However, as the dust settles on Saturday’s result, what are the positives all Australians can take away from our nation’s 45th referendum?

1. Indigenous Equality Reaffirmed

In 1967, over 90 per cent of Australians voted in favour of including Indigenous people in the census and empowering the federal government to legislate for Aboriginal people. That referendum took place in a decade that saw the full political equality of Aboriginal Australians affirmed, including their right to vote and stand for political office.

Almost 60 years later, Australians were effectively asked if Indigenous Australians should receive unequal political rights via a permanent race-based advisory body in Canberra. Their resounding rejection of the 2023 proposal race was a conspicuous reaffirmation of the 1967 referendum.

Thus, for more than five decades, our nation’s body politic has maintained remarkable consistency in its belief in the fundamental equality of all Australians, regardless of race. Put another way, the majority of the nation believes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians do not need to be pandered or condescended to for the simple reason that they are already our equals.

2. National Unity Fortified

While the referendum debate was deeply divisive, the eventual outcome was clear and resounding. A hefty majority of Australians agree that there are far more constructive ways to address Indigenous disadvantage than the one recently offered.

Note that a constitutionally-enshrined advisory body in Canberra was not the only thing rejected on Saturday. The Uluru Statement from the Heart — the political manifesto behind the Voice — effectively argued for two competing Australian sovereignties.

“The invasion that started at Botany Bay is the origin of the fundamental grievance between the old and new Australians,” the document argues. “Our sovereignty preexisted the Australian state and has survived it.”

Two competing Australias, divided along ethnic lines, perpetually battling for the upper hand in Canberra? It was a recipe for an ugly but permanent national division. Whether or not most voters were aware of the Uluru Statement’s more radical aims, they have repudiated it — and future generations will thank them.

3. Identity Politics Rejected

Over the last decade, we have seen a concerted effort from many quarters to reduce people to their physical attributes, and reward or hinder them accordingly.

Identity politics is a reductionistic way of viewing the world, and an anaemic way of viewing our fellow human travellers, who are made in God’s image as one-of-a-kind individuals.

Cultural Marxism has taken this a step further, using race to categorise people as “oppressed” and “oppressor”. Western Marxists have been very successful at weaponising Indigenous people against Western institutions which — ironically — have been uniquely successful at protecting their dignity and equality in law.

It is a credit to voters and a blessing for Australia that such a strong majority have resisted this cynical ploy, choosing to view Indigenous Australians as individuals, not avatars of a political cause.

 

Read the rest of the article here

The Voice Is Silenced

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

Yesterday, Australia voted in a referendum to change our constitution to include a so-called Voice to Parliament. The Voice would have been effectively a third chamber of Parliament that represented the concerns of indigenous people, able to veto any legislation or executive action of the Australian Government.

This referendum will go down as Australia’s Brexit moment. As with the Brexit vote in the UK, the ordinary people of Australia told their elite overlords to get out of identity politics and the “woke” agenda and start listening to the people who pay for all this stuff.

There are many reasons why the Voice is wrong in principle, including the following:

  • It gives one group of people extra rights not enjoyed by others
  • The aboriginal industry has over 1000 groups paid for by tax payers already
  • In Parliament, the proportion of indigenous Members and Senators exceeds the proportion of the general population. If they cannot be a “Voice” to the Government, (their job description is literally to represent the interests of their electorate), then who can?
  • The Voice would not solve the problems of remote aborigines who are the 20% who comprise the gap between mainstream Australia and indigenous Australia
  • The Voice would just be a talk fest for the inner city elites who already have plenty of platforms to voice their grievances

In Australia, constitutional change is difficult to achieve. As well as getting a national majority in favour, proponents must also win a majority in a majority of states (i.e. 4 out of 6 states). To achieve that, history shows that both sides of politic need to be actively in favour. In this case they weren’t.

So here are the results from the AEC web site as of close of counting on Saturday night. The vast majority of votes have been counted, but the result cannot be officially declared for two weeks until postal votes are included.

Overall, the vote was about 60% “No” nationally and in every state. Even Victoria, the wokest state ended up 54% “No”. Early in counting, it almost looked like it would be about 50-50, but the later counting brought it more into line with the rest of the country.

Interestingly SA and WA which were the two states that the “Yes” campaign had to win to ensure the majority of states, they had an even greater “No” vote. In other words, the more people saw of this proposal, the more likely they were to reject it.

If you go to the last line in the table you see the ACT vote. They were the exact opposite of the rest of the country- 60% “Yes”. The Canberra bubble is the cause of most of the problems in this country. Dominated by the bureaucracy, the ACT is exactly out of step with the rest of the nation. It must surely be time to dismantle Canberra- that would be a constitutional change that could get through.

Even The Electoral Commission Is Biased

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

I have always been proud of our electoral system. We don’t have the issues the USA has, foe example, because we have a long tradition of independent and fair election administration that is separete from the Government and from all politics.

Now that seems to have ocme to an end, with the AEC tipping the scales in favour of “Yes” in the referendum.

From news.com.au

A sample ballot paper. Picture: AEC

#f6f6f6;color: ;font-family: sans-serif">‘Tick will be accepted, cross will not’: AEC boss slammed for confusing Voice referendum rule

The head of the AEC has sparked backlash after suggesting that ticks will be counted as votes for Yes but crosses will not be counted as Nos.

The head of the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) has sparked confusion after suggesting that ticks will be counted as Yes votes but crosses will not be counted as Nos in the Voice referendum.

On referendum day, widely expected to be October 14, Australians will be asked to write either “yes” or “no” in English on the ballot paper to the question, “A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice. Do you approve this proposed alteration?”

But appearing on Sky News on Wednesday, Australian Electoral Commissioner Tom Rogers was asked by host Tom Connell whether scrutineers would accept other types of marks inside the box.

“It’s a bit simpler than a normal election, it’s a yes or no — are you accepting anything inside the box?” Connell said. “A tick, a cross, a yes, a number one? How broad will you allow this, given the intention of people is going to be pretty clear, you’d think?”

Mr Rogers said it was a “great question” and again urged people to “make sure you write on that box ‘yes’ or ‘no’ in English”.

“Now there are some savings provisions, but I need to be very clear with people – when we look at that, it is likely that a tick will be accepted as a formal vote for yes, but a cross will not be accepted as a formal vote,” he said.

“We’re being very clear with people, part of our education campaign will talk about this, the materials in the polling place so people can look at it. But please, make sure you write ‘yes’ or ‘no’ clearly on the ballot paper in English. That way you can assure yourself that your vote will count.”

Connell suggested that accepting a tick but not a cross might “effectively inflate the ‘yes’ side”.

“The no side might say, well hang on, it’s a lower bar for the yes side,” he said.

“No not at all,” Mr Rogers said.

“That’s why we’re spending a lot of time talking to the community about what constitutes a valid vote. There will be very clear information on the ballot paper, in the polling place. We’re spending a lot of time on that issue and what we’re trying to do is make sure under the legislation, that when the voter’s intention is clear that those votes are included.”

Connell then asked, “What about ‘y’ or ‘n’?”

“Again the legislation says yes or no is a formal vote,” Mr Rogers said.

“There are some things called savings provisions and given the fact we’re trying to give effect to the voter’s intent, it is likely that a ‘y’ or an ‘n’ would be counted under the savings provisions. But I get nervous even talking about that because then people hear mixed messages. It’s just important to write either yes or no on that ballot paper.”

2GB host Ben Fordham on Thursday slammed Mr Rogers’ comments.

“How bizarre,” he said. “A tick counts as yes but cross does not count as no. That sounds dodgy. If you’re going to count the ticks, you’ve got to count the crosses, don’t you? Otherwise the yes camp has an advantage. Surely he would see the unlevel playing field here. But apparently not.”

Fordham said the AEC “has one job”.

“We’re giving them $365 million to hold the referendum,” he said. “Tom Rogers is on more than the Prime Minister, he earns $600,000 a year. How hard is it to get this right?”

Fordham said it was “ironic” that Mr Rogers was “warning about fake news”.

This week the AEC launched its referendum education campaign, Your Answer Matters, with Mr Rogers telling the ABC the Voice debate had generated the “highest level of mis- and-disinformation we’ve seen online”.

“Well Tom, I think you’ve just added to the confusion,” Fordham said.

Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott later appeared on 2GB, agreeing with the host that “it seems awfully confusing”.

“It does, and it’s quite simple, I would have thought,” Mr Abbott said.

“You either vote yes or you vote no, and I’m certainly urging people to vote no. But the problem with all of this is that there’s a suspicion that officialdom is trying to make it easier for one side. It seems that it’s going to be easier to get a yes vote than a no vote if a mere tick is going to count for a yes but you’ve got to specifically write ‘no’ to vote no. This is the worry all along that there is a lot of official bias in this whole referendum process.”

The former PM agreed with Fordham that “you’ve got to have the same rule for both camps”.

“I would have thought so, otherwise it’s not a level playing field, it’s not a fair fight,” Mr Abbott said.

“If a tick is a yes, why wouldn’t a cross be a no? And really the only way to get away from this kind of confusion is to make it absolutely crystal clear that you either vote no or you vote yes, but marks of one sort or another that are neither no nor yes don’t count.”

Mr Abbott added, “Unfortunately, I don’t want to be personally critical of the Electoral Commissioner, but nevertheless it does seem that this is causing confusion, and that’s a real problem.”

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese will officially announce the date of the Voice referendum in the must-win state of South Australia next Wednesday and kick off a six-week campaign.

It’s widely anticipated Australians will head to the polls on October 14 to vote in the first referendum in 24 years.

The PM is set to join prominent Voice supporters in Adelaide next week to announce the date in a bid to turn the tide and rally support for the proposed constitutional change.

In order for a referendum to succeed, it must win the majority of votes in a majority of states.

Only eight of 44 referendums have succeeded in Australia’s 122-year history — all with bipartisan support.

The latest polls have support for the Voice slumping in every state, and according to the latest Newspoll surveys the “Yes” vote is ahead in only South Australia and NSW.

The votes are evenly split in Victoria, while the “No” vote is leading in Western Australia, Queensland, and Tasmania, with the No campaign confident it can win over voters.

In a statement, Mr Albanese said the referendum campaign would be a chance to “celebrate our shared history and build a better shared future”.

“Very soon, our nation will have a once-in-a-generation chance to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in our Constitution and make a positive difference to their lives with a Voice,” he said.

“Next week, the date will be announced. I will be campaigning for constitutional recognition because if not now, when? Nothing to lose, everything to gain. Every Australian will get a say in this. Every Australian will have the opportunity to vote yes for a practical, positive difference in people’s lives.”

More Coverage

Mr Albanese has ruled out legislating a Voice to Parliament if the bid for constitutional reform falls short, saying he will respect Australia’s wishes.

frank.chung@news.com.au

Top Covid Scientists Made US$325 Million in Royalties

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment

The Covid scam-demic knocked the last remnants of belief in Government and science.

If you still think that our leaders were only interested in keeping us safe, have a read of this. It is USA- centric, but if you change the names and reduce the dollar amounts, some people became quite wealthy from promoting fear, lockdowns and vaccines.

There is a reason why no political leader has any interest in a Royal Commission into Pandemic Responses.

From Daily Declaration:

royalties

Top Covid Scientists Made US$325 Million in Royalties

Ben Terangi

15 AUGUST 2023

3.5 MINS

Dr Anthony Fauci and Dr Francis Collins were among the recipients of the royalties, as an ethical shadow is cast over their Covid legacy.

While Americans suffered under draconian mandates and struggled to put food on the table, scientists from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) were collecting millions of dollars in hidden royalties, according to a new report.

More than US$325 million in royalties were paid to thousands of government scientists between 2009 and 2020, the documents reveal. Among those to cash in were former White House Chief Medical Advisor Dr Anthony Fauci and former NIH Director Dr Francis Collins, who together took home 58 payments relating to Covid-19 mRNA products.

The release of the records — which ran 1,500 pages long and detailed tens of thousands of transactions — had been stonewalled by the NIH but were eventually surrendered and made public last week by taxpayer watchdog group Open The Books.

Dr Anthony Fauci’s Conflict of Interest

The generous patrons listed in the report included Chinese and Russian entities and pharmaceutical companies. Some benefactors had in turn received U.S. federal grants and contracts, funded by taxpayers, raising serious conflict of interest concerns for government scientists who were in on the take, such as the high profile duo Fauci and Collins.

Collins, for example, was paid by at least four firms that have been awarded nearly $50 million by the U.S. government since 2008.

The revelation may help shed light on the otherwise unexplained fortunes of Fauci, who served as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) for almost four decades until his retirement in 2022. Between 2019 and 2020, Dr Anthony Fauci’s net worth almost doubled from US$7.5 million to $12.6 million, despite his federal government salary totalling US$450,000 per year.

Open The Books CEO Adam Andrzejewski said:

While Dr Fauci has been a government bureaucrat for more than 55 years, his household net worth skyrocketed during the pandemic. Fauci’s soaring net worth was based on career-end salary spiking, lucrative cash prizes awarded by non-profit organizations around the world and an ever-larger investment portfolio.

Despite becoming a figure of controversy, the system has rewarded Dr Fauci handsomely. For example, he is the top-paid federal employee, his first-year golden parachute retirement pension is the largest in federal history, and he’s accepting US$1 million prizes from foreign non-profits.

In light of the revelations, it is difficult to see how Fauci’s tireless promotion of Covid-19 injectables remained untainted by personal financial incentive.

Francis Collins, Once Praised By Christian Leaders

The Open the Books report likewise casts an ethical shadow over Dr Francis Collins, once celebrated as an exemplar man of faith by top evangelical leaders.

During the Covid era, leaders like Ed Stetzer, Russell Moore, Tim Keller, Rick Warren and N.T. Wright praised Collins for using science for the glory of God and the benefit of humanity, and they promoted him widely via their platforms.

However, many of Collins’ scientific claims later fell flat — including that the lab leak theory was a “conspiracy”, that Covid-19 injections immunised those who took them, and that a cloth mask was a “life saving medical device” (which even the CDC refutes).

Worse, it ultimately came to light that at the same time pastors were hawking Collins as a fellow believer, Collins was secretly colluding with Fauci to discredit factual information about Covid-19 in the mind of the public.

As previously reported by the Daily Declaration:

Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request, we now know that at the same time these interviews were taking place, Collins knew that top U.S. and British scientists suspected the Wuhan Institute of Virology — not nature — as the source of the virus. And he was eager to bury the theory, fearful of “great potential harm to science and international harm”.

No doubt, Collins was also concerned about harm to his own reputation. In his role as National Institutes of Heath director, Francis Collins has long supported — and his agencies have generously funded — the gain-of-function research that probably explains the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

Uncovered emails also show Collins smearing eminent lockdown critics as “fringe epidemiologists”, and calling for a “a quick and devastating published take down” of their ideas to shift public opinion.

Eye-Watering Pharmaceutical Profits

The NIH permits its employees to take up to 15% for royalties between $2,000 and $50,000, and up to 25% for royalties above $50,000. The department’s scientists are not allowed to receive more than $150,000 annually from royalties.

Fauci has previously claimed that he donates all royalties to charity, however he is yet to provide evidence of the donations.

In a seperate but recent matter, Dr Fauci was referred to the Department of Justice by Senator Rand Paul for allegedly lying to Congress about government funding of Chinese labs. His fall from grace follows his earlier, repeated claims that “I represent science”, and that “attacks on me quite frankly are attacks on science”.

Dr Anthony Fauci is not the only public figure to have feathered his nest while Americans suffered under Covid policies that devastated the economy.

An investigative report by The People’s Vaccine Alliance found that Covid-19 injectables helped create at least nine new billionaires with “a combined wealth greater than the cost of vaccinating the world’s poorest countries.”

Their combined net wealth of $19.3 billion came thanks to “the excessive profits pharmaceutical corporations with monopolies on COVID vaccines are making.”

In 2022, Pfizer’s revenue reached a record US$100 billion, and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla took home a US$33 million salary after receiving a 36% pay raise.

About the Author: Ben Terangi

James McPherson: Labor Left Insists Safe, Legal, Rare Should Be Free, Compulsory

/ newlifenarrabri / Leave a comment
free abortions

From Daily Declaration:

Labor Left Insists: Safe, Legal and Rare Should Become Free and Compulsory

Delegates to Labor’s upcoming national conference will urge Prime Minister Anthony Albanese to provide free abortions across Australia.

Not only should abortions be free, but delegates from the powerful Emily’s List faction will insist that publicly funded hospitals be forced to provide them.

Oh, and the bus fare for women travelling to abortion providers from regional areas should also be borne by the taxpayer.

The policy recommendations will be made by Labor’s influential Emily’s List members including Tanya Plibersek, Anne Aly, Penny Wong, Linda Burney and Katy Gallagher — who a few years ago successfully pushed for women’s quotas within the Party.

Have you noticed that the Left typically believe everything should either be free, or illegal?

That’s the immovable binary of the non-binary crowd.

As for the slippery slope — wait, I mean WATER SLIDE — of abortion policy… well, first we said it should be safe, rare and legal. Now we say it must be free.

And the taxpayer will drive you there if you need a ride.

Totalitarianism

Oh, and if you’re a Catholic hospital that has been providing care and assistance to people in need for the past 100 years, start doing abortions or we’ll shut you down. And provide euthanasia while you’re at it. If you’re going to end the lives of babies, you might as well end the lives of seniors while you’re at it. What’s the difference?

And don’t think we’re joking.

If we can take over Calvary Hospital in Canberra because of its “problematic” views, don’t think we won’t take over every other Christian institution that fails to sign up to the death cult.

Also, love, tolerance and inclusion.

Irony

Imagine arguing that killing a baby in the womb should be free for everyone, but infertile couples wanting to build this country via IVF must pay around $10,000 per cycle.

Attempt to arrest the declining birth rate, and you’ll get zero help from the government.

But ensure we have so few people being born that we need to continually ship in hundreds of thousands from overseas, and the government will pay to pick up your cab fare.

If the motions, to be put to the conference in August, win the support of a majority of delegates, they will become part of Labor’s policy platform for the next term of parliament.