Armadale-WA - Federal Politics web page

This web page is to express some thoughts about federal politics in Australia

Posted 06 February 2015

In February 2015, Australia is yet again in the midst of a Bushfire Season, when the federal parliament fiddles while Australia burns.

as viewed today, is

" F-35 Joint Strike Fighter purchase 'a great national scandal' says Coalition MP
Date June 16, 2014
Government backbencher Dennis Jensen has condemned the Prime Minister's $12.4 billion plan to buy 58 F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets as a "great national scandal" and "worse than a disgrace".
In an extraordinary broadside in Parliament on Monday night, Dr Jensen warned that Australia's national security was being corrupted by an "industrial-military complex" interested in promoting the global arms trade.
Fairfax revealed on Monday that Australia was now the seventh-largest importer of large-scale military materiel in the world, and also the biggest customer of the world's largest weapons producer, the United States. Australia buys 10 per cent of all American weapons exports.
Australian purchases of major arms - such as warships, fighter planes, and tanks - increased by 83 per cent from 2004-08 to 2009-13.
In April, Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced the government would buy an additional 58 F-35 Join Strike Fighter jets at a cost of $12.4 billion. It will cost another $12 billion to keep the fighters operational over their active lifetime. The 58 aircraft are an addition to the 14 F-35s Australia already had on order. "

as viewed today, is

" Joint Strike Fighters: Australia's first F-35 jet takes inaugural flight in United States Posted October 01, 2014 09:17:09 ... The Federal Government pledged $24 billion to buy and deploy 72 of the futuristic stealth fighter jets, in what is Australia's largest military acquisition. "

as viewed today, is an article describing the Bombardier CL415 Water Bomber, used for fighting bushfires.

The cost per Bombardier CL415 Water Bomber, is stated in that article, to be 37 million Canadian dollars (CAD), as at March 2014. shows the current currency conversion rate (at the time of writing this) to be that 1 CAD buys about 1.03 AUD, so the price would be about 38million AUD per plane.

The manufacturer's web page about that aeroplane model, is at

This means that, with a 12 thousand million (the usage of the word "billion", to represent a thousand million, is simply a lie - a billion is a million million) AUD price for 58 Joint Strike Fighters, if that expenditure was halved, and six thousand million dollars was instead, spent on Bombardier CL415 water bombers, (which would still allow for 43 Joint Strike Fighters, with the ones previously ordered, which would be more than two Joint Strike Fighters per million people living in the country), that could buy 6000/38 -> 157 (.8) Bombardier CL415 water bombers, which, at about 12 per squadron, would give 13 squadrons of Bombardier CL415 water bombers for Australia, so that Australia would be much better equipped for dealing with its massive and many bushfires, instead of putting firefighters on the ground, and, residents in affected areas, and, property, and, the environment, and, Australian native fauna and flora, at completely unnecessary risk.

Even six squadrons of 12 Bombardier CL415 water bombers, for the whole country - two squadrons for Western Australia (which is about a third of the country's area), two squadrons for central Australia (South Australia and the Northern Territory), and, two squadrons for the states of the east coast, would make a massive difference, to fighting bushfires in Australia, and, would mean that Australia would be serious about fighting bushfires, instead of the federal parliament deliberately endangering the people of Australia, especially the firefighters on the ground, whose lives are deliberately put in danger, by the federal parliament.

But, the Australian military forces, especially, the air force, are not about defending Australia and its people, but about killing.

And, so, the bushfires in Australia - the lives that are lost due to the bushfires, and, the damage to property and to Australian native fauna and flora, and, the atmospheric pollution from bushfires, are all the complete responsibility of the Australian federal parliament, which has the attitude "Why defend Australia, when we can cause more deaths and kill people? It is more fun to kill, than to save lives and defend the country, so we will divert money from defending Australia, into more expensive devices for killing people."

The primary objective of each level of legislature in Australia, is to do as much harm as possible, while taking as much money as possible, to line the pockets of the members of the legislature.

Added Saturday 16 January 2016

With the recent massive Yarloop fire, which, apart from the massive area of destruction, including the destruction of the town of Yarloop, and, the loss of two lives of men found dead in a burnt-out home in Yarloop, and, the bushfire at Forrestdale, that threatened the rest of Armadale, and, the other bushfires that will have happened in this state, in this year, with the federal parliament, directly responsible for the extent of the devastation and the risks, through the reckless neglect of the federal parliament, the following has been found.

At is

16 Oct 2015 16:35
Tatjana Obrazcova
Bombardier has decided to shut down the completion facility for CL-415 water-bombers while the programme remains paused pending further orders.
Since 1998, Bombardier has built the CL-415 at a plant in Montreal, then transported the firefighting amphibian to North Bay, Ontario, for completion work.
Last April, Bombardier announced internally that the programme would be paused after the last three aircraft on order are delivered this year if no more sales contracts are signed.
All three aircraft remaining in the backlog at the beginning of this year have been delivered, and no new orders have been signed.
So Bombardier decided not to renew the lease on the North Bay facility where the aircraft are completed with firefighting equipment.
Activity at the manufacturing facility in Montreal remains paused for now, but 60 employees continue to market the aircraft and support the existing fleet.
The original piston-powered CL-215 amphibian played a key role in Canadair’s evolution from licensed maker of foreign military aircraft into a commercial aircraft manufacturer in the late 1960s.
The CL-215 served to bridge the company's aircraft manufacturing between the demise of the CL-44 airliner and the launch of the CL-600 Challenger business jet. Bombardier later acquired Canadair from the Canadian government.
The turboprop-engined CL-415 was introduced in 1994, but sales have recently slowed.
Bombardier delivered 240 CL-215 and CL-415 models combined, including the CL-415 maritime patrol version and turboprop-powered CL-215T variant.
The in-service fleet includes 162 aircraft operated by 22 customers.

So, it is made quite clear, that bushfires are regarded as unimportant, as is human life and the environment, especially, in Australia, where, having bankrupted the country with its mismanagement and extravagant wastage, the Australian federal parliament is determined to spend tens of thousands of millions of dollars of money that the bankrupt country does not have, and, can probably never repay, to engage in an arms race, buying unproven killing equipment, so that the members of the federal parliament can get their perverse pleasure from killing people, rather than spending money to try to defend Australia and its people.
And, in the meantime, producers of equipment, that Australia desperately needs to defend Australia and its people; equipment such as these Bombadier CL-415 water bombers, are having to close down production, because governments, such as the Australian federal parliament, are simply not interested in trying to protect their own people and their own countries.

After all, why spend money to protect your country and your people, when you can "get your jollies", by spending much more money; money that you do not have, and can probably, never repay, to kill people?

And, if you have fires in your house, every year, that kill some residents, and, that destroy property, why invest in a sprinkler system and fire extinguishers, to save lives and property, in your house, when you can borrow money that you can't repay, to buy a machine gun to install in your front room, to get your jollies, shooting at your neighbours and at passers-by?

Posted 05 February 2015

With the fiasco going on in the Queensland state election, where the results probably will not be finalised before a couple of weeks after election day, as usually happens with the corrupt and deliberately obstructive electoral systems for the Australian parliaments, it is about time that elections were made honest and democratic and efficient in Australia.

This is something that applies to each of the state, territory and federal parliaments in Australia.

Australian members of parliament are selected by the gangster system.

"Preferential voting" is a system designed to be antidemocratic, inefficient, and is controlled by gangsters, for the benefit of gangsters, and is designed to hinder the people from electing the members of the parliaments.

Why is the "Preferential voting" system, a gangster controlled system, and anti-democratic, and, inefficient? Because, instead of the simple, efficient, and, democratic system of "First Past the Post" voting, where an elector puts a single mark against the candidate that the elector wants elected, and, the person who gets the most votes for them, wins the election, with each voting paper being counted only once, the "preferential voting" system results in, instead of the candidate getting the most votes for the candidate, winning, the candidate who gets the least votes against the candidate (and, that is not the same as getting the most votes for the candidate), wins the election. Dishonestly, and undemocratically, but, that person is declared the winner. "Preferential voting" is a gangster activity, as deals are made, between candidates, to prevent another candidate from winning. So, if an election for a seat, involves five candidates; one from the party representing men in grey suits, one representing bogans, one representing women who wear pink bows, and, one representing people who want heroin legalised, and, one who wants to make members of parliament, accountable, and, in the "Preferential voting" system, apart from the one who wants to make members of parliament accountable, all of the others find that policy to be completely unacceptable, as, if any of them are elected, they do not want to be accountable, and, so, they gang up against the candidate who wants to make members of parliament, accountable. So, the one representing the men in grey suits, thinks that the one representing women who wear pink bows, should get their second preference, and the candidate representing bogans, gets their third preference, the candidate who wants heroin legalised, prefers bogans to men in grey suits and women who wear pink bows, and the candidates who do not want members of parliament, all work out "preference sharing arrangements", putting the candidate who wants members of parliament, to be accountable, last. So, the candidate who wants members of parliament, to be accountable, gets 40% of the first preferences, the candidate representing men in grey suits, gets 22% of the first preferences, the candidate who represents women who wear pink bows, gets 15% of the first preferences, the candidate representing bogans, gets 13% of the first preferences, and the candidate who wants heroin legalised, gets 12% of the first preferences. Now, if that was the "First Past the Post" system, the person who wants to make members of parliament accountable, would win, having almost twice as many votes, as the candidate with the next highest number of votes, and, the decision would be known, quite fast. But, instead, as the people supporting the candidate who wants heroin legalised, gave the candidate supporting bogans, their second preference, and, as that knocks out the candidate who represents women who wear pink bows, some of the women who ear pink bows, like bogans, so give their second preference to the candidate representing bogans, and so, that knocks out the candidate who represents men who wear grey suits, and, the remaining preferences of the people supporting the candidate who represents me who wear grey suits, go to the candidate who represents bogans, so, the candidate who represents bogans, is declared the winner, having received only 13% of the first preferences, or, only 13% of the votes for the candidate, and, the least number of votes against a candidate. The candidate that wants to make members of parliament, accountable, therefore, received more than three times the number of votes, for the candidate, than the person who is declared the winner, but, the system is designed to favour the gangsters, and thence, the candidates with the least votes against them, rather than electing the candidate with the most votes for a candidate. And, it takes so much longer, to find the "election" outcome, for the preferential system, as the voting papers for the candidates that get knocked out at each counting have to have their "preferences" transferred, and, so, it is gratuitously inefficient, and, anti-democratic, and, the gangsters win. Not the candidates with the most votes, but, the gangsters. It is the Australian way. The parliaments are run by gangsters, for the benefit of gangsters. And, that is apart from the bribery and other corruption, inherent in Australian parliaments.

So, we need parliamentary elections to involve "First Past the Post" voting, for all members of each level of legislature, so that we can have democratic and efficient elections. It is simple. And, the voting, itself, is simple and efficient, in "First Past the Post" voting, in addition to the elections themselves, being democratic and efficient.

And, each jurisdiction (state, territory, and federal), should have a single house of parliament - a unicameral system, with all members having the same term of office, and, all elections (state, territory, and federal, and, local government), being held at the same time.

But, this is Australia, where democracy and efficiency, like human rights, are banned, by the legislatures.

Posted 03 February 2015

Published in the ABC Online News on 02 February 2015, is the following;

When asked whether he had considered resigning to make way for a new prime minister, Mr Abbott responded "no".

"It's the people that hire and frankly it's the people that should fire," he said.

Now, for the Prime Minister Tony Abbott to honour that assurance; that the voters have the right to fire, as well as to hire,
the Prime Minister has a duty to honour that assurance, and to honour that assurance, the Prime Minister has a duty to call a snap double dissolution election, as soon as possible, and to, simultaneously with the obligatory snap double dissolution election, have a binding referendum to change the Australian Constitution, so as to provide, in the Australian Constitution, for recall elections/referenda, whereby the term of office of any member of the federal parliament, or, the whole of the federal parliament, may be terminated, and the electorate subjected to a new election, on presentation of a petition signed by 5% of the eligible voters; to call a new election for a single seat, 5% of that electorate, and, to call a new election for the whole of the parliament, 5% of the whole of the total Australian eligible voters.

And, the relevant legislation should be amended, to ensure that all federal elections require First Past the Post (FPP) voting, to make the elections democratic and efficient.

And, a referendum question should be put to the Australian people, so that, if the change to the federal constitution, is approved, any member of the parliament, who does not serve the full term of office for which the person is elected, is determined to have breached the contract of service, and thence forfeits all benefits of the office, including parliamentary superannuation benefits, and, is required to pay the full cost of a by-election to fill the seat, with the only exceptions being death or a terminal disease that is not self-inflicted.

Only when those events have occurred, will the Prime Minister Tony Abbot's assurance, be honoured.

From Wikipedia,

"A recall election (also called a recall referendum or representative recall) is a procedure by which voters can remove an elected official from office through a direct vote before his or her term has ended. Recalls, which are initiated when sufficient voters sign a petition, have a history dating back to the ancient Athenian democracy[1] and are a feature of several contemporary constitutions."

And, similarly, but, not for the same reason as honouring the assurance given by the Prime Minister Tony Abbott, a binding referendum question should also be put to the eligible electors of Australia, as to whether the Australian Constitution should be amended to provide for Citizen Initiated Referenda to be convened upon presentation of a petition signed by at least 5% of all eligible Australian electors.


Each level of legislature should by its constitution, limit the remuneration of its members, so that in relation to the median weekly income for all adults at or above the minimum voting age within the jurisdiction of the particular legislature,
the ordinary members receive weekly remuneration no more than the median weekly income,
any officers, such as ministers, receive a loading of up to 20$ of that remuneration for ordinary members
and the leader of the legislature, be it prime minister, premier, chief minister or mayor,
receives a loading of up to 30% of the remuneration for ordinary members,
with benefits such as superannuation entitlements, sick leave, etc,
at the same rates relative to weekly income, and the same terms and conditions,
as for median weekly wage and salary income earning employees.

And, all of the state and territory parliaments should also implement provisions as described above, for
Recall Elections/Referenda
Citizen Initiated Referenda
First Past the Post (FPP) voting in all elections for all members of the legislatures
The Remuneration provisions above
And the breach of contract of service provisions mentioned above

This web page is authorised and printed by Bret Busby, 2 Pelham Street, Armadale.

I can be contacted by email, regarding this web page by clicking on the link at Bret

This web page was last updated on 16 January 2016.