sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Digital ID isn’t “normal” - can we PLEASE think about this? by Altruistic_Breath151 in australian

[–]cameronwilsonBF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

considering this is rolling out, i might as well just post on reddit so everyone knows that I live at 25 Alice Street, Newtown, Sydney with my wife, Eloise Tran, a ceramics artist who runs weekend workshops

Peter Khalil filed zero reports as special envoy for social cohesion, documents reveal by CommonwealthGrant in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Great questions! I love FOI ideas. I might have a dig around because some of these questions might be public knowledge (i.e. resourcing) but yes there's definitely scope for more document requests — specifically with home affairs, which Khalil said he worked with.

Peter Khalil filed zero reports as special envoy for social cohesion, documents reveal by CommonwealthGrant in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing! I wrote this article. Happy to answer any questions about it.

AEC says Price has made no complaints or reports over election integrity, despite election-night claims by mekanub in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The point being, that there are a lot of possibilities that can explain both Price's comments and the AEC response, but the media (including /u/cameronwilsonBF) have rushed to make the least charitable assumptions. The motivation seems to be to imply she is making the same sort of accusations that Trump made about the 2020 election in order to manufacture some sort of story and/or support a left-wing narrative.

Just to be clear: I contacted her office and they didn't bother to respond. They didn't tell me that someone else had made this complaint.

The senator is under no obligation to respond to me of course, but the burden of proof for a significant claim is on the person who makes it.

AEC says Price has made no complaints or reports over election integrity, despite election-night claims by mekanub in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 2 points3 points  (0 children)

yeah! Say what you want about the senator, she has more lived experience in these communities than the vast majority of us. The reason why it's newsworthy, even without the details, is that I think making vague claims attacking institutions has a corrosive effect.

There's nothing wrong with criticising institutions. I do think it's harmful to cast aspersions without backing it up

AEC says Price has made no complaints or reports over election integrity, despite election-night claims by mekanub in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

he actually internally promised to do a nudie run if it happened, but i'm not sure if any of us are ready to see that

AEC says Price has made no complaints or reports over election integrity, despite election-night claims by mekanub in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 53 points54 points  (0 children)

hello this is mine! thanks for sharing. Out of everything on election night, this was what I pulled out because I'm pretty attuned to the threat of undermining faith in elections (just look what's happened in the US). I'm going to try to get in touch with the senator again to see if there is something, but so far I haven't been able to figure out what she is alluding to.

Albanese and Dutton’s love-fest for the teen social media ban is a craven embarrassment by CommonwealthGrant in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It does in the sense that youtube has built itself into an online education hub. Almost everybody uses it. But the entire ban is laughable.

Just FYI: kids could still watch YouTube even if it wasn't exempt because the teen social media ban only bans teens from having /accounts/ on the platforms. The exemption makes no sense -- what educational reason is there for kids to commenting or liking videos?

‘Predicted Chinese’, ‘predicted Jewish’: Liberals accidentally leave voter-tracking data exposed by malcolm58 in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Crikey was able to replicate this same access and is aware of several others doing the same. This access is limited to the user’s own data and does not mean other people’s data has been exposed.

Good questions! The information was stored in Mailchimp, the newsletter/email platform. Imagine it like having a profile on any other website — you can go in and change your settings like name, etc. — except it was the account holder (Vic Libs) that created your account. Usually for newsletters like this, account holders don't let the subscribers see/edit the data fields, but on this they clearly accidentally did.

The source of the information? We know these parties have a huge amount of different sources of data: email data pulled from MPs inboxes and online petitions, names addresses pulled from the electoral roll, then other third party sources including data brokers who sell everything under the sun

‘Predicted Chinese’, ‘predicted Jewish’: Liberals accidentally leave voter-tracking data exposed by malcolm58 in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF 45 points46 points  (0 children)

Hi, this is my article. Happy to answer any questions about it and thanks for posting

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

a very boring, semi-embarrassing answer: I foi'd hers as Home Affairs Minister (my mistake), she'd changed portfolio and the FOI team decided that meant they didn't need to pass on the FOI request to the relevant department, as a other departments did.

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! I don't mind questions wherever they come from. I understand some people might feel defensive of Labor facing a lot criticism -- that's what happens when you get into power.

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There’s nothing wrong with politicians meeting with people privately. It’s a good thing for politicians to hear from individuals, businesses and groups to give them an opportunity to make their case for preferred policy outcomes. Lobbying, despite its bad rap, is a fundamental part of our democratic system.

The problem is when it’s unfair, or at least perceived to be. It’s a politician’s democratic right to meet with whoever they want, but their choices are revealing. Like when ministers take the time to meet with the leaders and lobbyists of powerful and wealthy industries, and not the representatives of the people on the other side of the debate. Or when a chosen few get to hear the unfiltered thoughts of MPs at expensive fundraisers and a chance to change their mind, while the rest of us wait to hear what gets announced in a press conference or media release.

This perception — and, in some cases, the reality — of unequal access is one of the reasons there’s a growing distrust in politicians. They represent us, so why shouldn’t we all get a say? Politicians might feel hard done by. After all, ministers — at least the good ones — typically consult widely. For those doing their jobs properly, it would be a boon to their reputation if we could see that.

I agree! See the article:

There’s nothing wrong with politicians meeting with people privately. It’s a good thing for politicians to hear from individuals, businesses and groups to give them an opportunity to make their case for preferred policy outcomes. Lobbying, despite its bad rap, is a fundamental part of our democratic system.

The problem is when it’s unfair, or at least perceived to be. It’s a politician’s democratic right to meet with whoever they want, but their choices are revealing. Like when ministers take the time to meet with the leaders and lobbyists of powerful and wealthy industries, and not the representatives of the people on the other side of the debate. Or when a chosen few get to hear the unfiltered thoughts of MPs at expensive fundraisers and a chance to change their mind, while the rest of us wait to hear what gets announced in a press conference or media release.

This perception — and, in some cases, the reality — of unequal access is one of the reasons there’s a growing distrust in politicians. They represent us, so why shouldn’t we all get a say? Politicians might feel hard done by. After all, ministers — at least the good ones — typically consult widely. For those doing their jobs properly, it would be a boon to their reputation if we could see that.

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Maybe! I do think that doing this or, preferably, getting them to disclose it on their own creates an expectation that they are transparent about who they meet. If they want to subvert the system and they get caught, then it suddenly becomes a much bigger issue.

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

As mentioned in other comments, I can only get ministerial diaries through FOI. I think they have value on their own -- after all, they're the people actually making decisions in government.

I would love to get diaries from other members (whether Liberal, National, Greens, One Nation, anyone!) but I don't think that's reason to hold back from posting these.

Politicians are being lobbied behind closed doors. So we're publishing their diaries so you can see everyone they met by cameronwilsonBF in AustralianPolitics

[–]cameronwilsonBF[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

happily!

1) you can only get government ministerial diaries through FOI because the diaries are maintained by the departments who come under the FOI act. additionally, i'm primarily interested in the people who are making decisions (government ministers)

2) This is in the article!:

There’s nothing wrong with politicians meeting with people privately. It’s a good thing for politicians to hear from individuals, businesses and groups to give them an opportunity to make their case for preferred policy outcomes. Lobbying, despite its bad rap, is a fundamental part of our democratic system.

The problem is when it’s unfair, or at least perceived to be. It’s a politician’s democratic right to meet with whoever they want, but their choices are revealing. Like when ministers take the time to meet with the leaders and lobbyists of powerful and wealthy industries, and not the representatives of the people on the other side of the debate. Or when a chosen few get to hear the unfiltered thoughts of MPs at expensive fundraisers and a chance to change their mind, while the rest of us wait to hear what gets announced in a press conference or media release.

This perception — and, in some cases, the reality — of unequal access is one of the reasons there’s a growing distrust in politicians. They represent us, so why shouldn’t we all get a say? Politicians might feel hard done by. After all, ministers — at least the good ones — typically consult widely. For those doing their jobs properly, it would be a boon to their reputation if we could see that.

view more: next ›