Recent stories exclusive to (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day now at the bottom of this page.
First Edition: "ON NOW" weekly abbreviated anotd fax-back -
Dial: 1902 211037 and follow the instructions.
(Note: costs 0.75 c per minute will be billed to your phone account under "ON NOW NEWS LETTER")
Current topical links (available to all readers):
[Links to the MAI]
[One Nation on-line DISCUSSION forum] [One Nation Federal Web Site]
Archive of weekly features (available to all readers):
[The Canberra Column] [Economic Rationalism]
an Aussie's viewpoint on Australia's first daily Internet newspaper.
Since October 1995
Pauline Hanson's One Nation webmaster followed by ASIO
Have you ever been followed before?
Yesterday I was. I had my digital camera handy and took the picture on the right of the car that followed me for miles. He freaked after he saw me taking the picture and sped off at about 200 km per hour.
I knew he was following me because I was driving fast and slow, changing lanes and streets with him constantly staying in my rear view mirror.
I was able to get him ahead of me by pulling alongside a car in the left lane and then moving in front of the car I had overtaken then applying my brakes heavily. This resulted in my pursuer being trapped into overtaking both of us.
Between the One Nation lines
At about 9am yesterday morning I was contacted by Barbara Hazelton who refused to tell me where she was or what phone number she could be contacted on. She told me that she was in hiding in the Gold Coast hinterland.
The basis of her call was to see whether I felt that the two Davids were a threat to the One Nation party. Somewhat bemused I remained non-committal to see what would happen next.
Within five minutes of the conversation ending I was contacted by Nicolas Rothwell from The Australian newspaper who said, and I quote, Barbara Hazelton told me that she spoke to you a few minutes ago and that we should contact you. Will you speak to us
I answered Yes.
Rothwell answered I will get Leisa Scott to contact you from our Brisbane office.
When Ms Scott phoned I told her to send me her questions by email and that I would respond in writing as I do not trust the media and their reporting ethics. My reply was not published in todays Australian because it did not match the image of a party in chaos being presented by Murdochs intellectual prostitutes otherwise know as Chiefs of Staff.
For the record here are my answers and my statement.
Leisa Scott, The Australian, wanted to know:
What my official involvement with Pauline Hanson's One Nation to which I
I am the web master on the Internet for Pauline Hansons One Nation.
How long I have been involved with the party to which I replied:
Since April 1997 - joined the night of the launch (Membership #6).
How I would describe my relationship with Pauline Hanson to which I
Excellent, a woman I admire deeply.
How I would describe my relationship with the two Davids to which I replied:
Professional (see statement below)
The questions below were answered in my written statement to Ms Scott:
What are my concerns, if any, about the way in which One Nation is being run?
What, if any, changes would I recommend to the running of the party?
Have you noticed any change in Ms Hanson's level of involvement and/or influence in the party?
What is my opinion of Barbara Hazelton's claim that Mr Oldfield and Mr Ettridge have undue influence over Ms Hanson?
Do I believe One Nation members have enough say in the party's direction?
Are there any elements of Ms Hazelton's claims which you agree or disagree with?
My statement to Leisa Scott fully authorised for publishing in whole or in part was not used:
I have a tremendous amount of time for Barbara and Helen. They have both been very involved with Pauline Hansons One Nation and served that party with a considerable amount of dedication. It is for this reason alone that I have agreed to comment.
I have read what both say about the two Davids and their alleged hold over Pauline Hanson and the running of the party. Barbara will know that I have shared concerns with her in the past.
However, what I have personally witnessed over the last few weeks has shown me conclusively and, without hesitation, that both David Oldfield and David Ettridge are critical to the ongoing development of One Nation.
The Queensland State Election was a triumph of people power at grass roots level working with the closely knit party executive. The most influential force, I believe, in the party gaining the support of the people of Queensland was David Oldfield.
Let me make it quite clear that Mr Oldfield, like all of us, is not without his faults but that should not be used as the basis of a personal attack on him or the party. This has been the case in newspaper, radio and television reports over the past few days.
I was given the unique opportunity to be part of history last weekend. I was invited, in my position as webmaster for the party, to join the eleven state candidates in meetings at Parliament House with statesmen and women including Pauline Hanson, Sir Joh Bjelke Petersen and Yvonne Chapman. No other media or outsiders were allowed in.
I watched the new MPs being trained, coached and guided for hours at a time by David Oldfield, a man whose obvious pride shone through in his pivotal role in turning Australian politics on its head and giving people a voice. I have never before seen David Oldfield so reflective as he was when coaching the new parliamentarians. He was free of the media and totally focussed on the mission that he had been given.
During these meetings both Pauline Hanson and David Oldfield made the statement that the MPs there were to be guided by the people who voted them in. It was made clear to them that neither Mrs Hanson nor Mr Oldfield would come between them and the wishes of their constituents. It was also made clear to them that the Queensland branch of One Nation must make its own decisions based on the wishes of the people it represented.
This flies in the face of what has been said in the papers, on the radio and the television. I believe Barbara Hazelton has lost sight of the bigger vision because of her very emotional attachment to Pauline and the party. This has blurred her perspective in the evolution of what was a very small entity when she started working for Pauline Hanson.
What Barbara and others have got to realise is that Pauline Hansons One Nation party has evolved, grown at incredible rate because the Australian people now realise that there is something dreadfully wrong with the manner in which the major political parties represent the mums and dads of Australia.
With this dramatic growth has come the need for delegation. Pauline Hanson has delegated a great deal of responsibility onto the shoulders of the two Davids, and the pressure shows on both of them at times. With all their faults and the mistakes they may have made in the day to day running of the party their ability to be focussed and to continue to hold on to what is effectively a wildly bucking horse shows an admirable dedication to the task that Pauline Hanson has given them.
I am reminded by Paulines comment at Hervey Bay last year where she said, "I will resign from politics if someone tries to run my party."
Without Pauline Hanson the party would be nothing. It is the embodiment of her spirit which drives all those below her (and that includes Messrs Oldfield and Ettridge).
Anyone who knows Pauline as well as I do knows that she means what she said at Hervey Bay.
END OF STATEMENT
In closing I note that Barbara says in todays edition of The Australian and I quote, she had been deluged by calls from her party colleagues supporting her and thanking her for speaking out.
As she told me she was not at home and not giving out her phone number I question that statement.
Facing the loss of a swag of Senate seats to One Nation if he went to a double dissolution, Prime Minister John Howard bended to changes to his ten point plan. His move came after he had negotiations with Independent Senator Brian Harradine who holds the balance of power in the Senate.
Harradine wanted his pound of flesh which resulted in two of the ten points being compromised:
Point 6: Aboriginal will have rights to negotiate but they will be restricted. State native title regimes where Canberra will discuss compensation if native title is wiped out.
Point 9: One living claimant must have a past or present physical connection to land to be able to negotiate. A six year sunset clause for native title is to be formerly lodged.
Howard was ecstatic saying, "It is an outcome based on the principle of treating all Australians equally, irrespective of their background, their occupation or their ethnic group."
Is it my imagination or is he starting to sound more and more like Pauline Hanson? He better watch out he might be called a "racist" unless he does a deal with Murdoch.
Pauline Hanson's One Nation party released its 13-point "Immigration, population and social cohesion" policy this afternoon. The following are the policy's "major principles" (the full eighteen page policy document will be posted later this week):
1. "A population policy must underwrite any immigration policy for Australia". Official immigration figures exclude many categories in which people come to live permanently in Australia ... the intention of such categories is to deliberately mislead the public. One Nation believes there is no justification for population growth in Australia.
2. "The government's responsibility is to its own citizens".
3. "Australians are the caretakers of the world's oldest, driest, least fertile landmass." In the face of environmental degradation, we should be proceeding slowly with population growth because it will exacerbate environmental problems.
4. "Opposition to mass migration should not be misinterpreted as being an anti-migrant philosophy. One Nation's disagreement is with government policy."
5. "Freedom of speech should be extended to all discussions on immigration and multicultural policies and the cry of racism should not be used to silence debate or to promote violence against those who wish to debate these issues."
6. "Australians, like other peoples of the world, have a right to maintain their unique identity and culture."
7. "Our migrant intake will be non-discriminatory on condition that the numbers do not significantly alter the ethnic and cultural make-up of the country".
8. "English is the official language of Australia and government policy will encourage widespread use of English within all communities and in all the institutions of the land."
9. "Compassion must be extended to genuine refugees but temporary refuge need not extend to long term permanent settlement in Australia."
10. "The government-institutionalised, publicly-funded policy of multiculturalism is not in the best interests migrants, nor of Australia, and will be abolished."
11. "No person other than an Australian citizen or a permanent resident of the Australian community has a basic right to enter Australia."
12. "Any person entering Australia for a period in excess of six months must pass both health and character screening."
13. "One Nation has a vision for Australia as a proud, independent, self-sustaining sovereign nation."
ONE Nation Queensland parliamentary leader Bill Feldman said yesterday his party was being short-changed on taxpayer funded staff backup for his 11-member team.
But Premier Peter Beattie defended the level of allocated resources yesterday, saying the One Nation team would have at least five staff, offices, computers, a chauffeur driven car, and as leader, Mr Feldman would get an extra $20,000 a year salary.
This would cost taxpayers $1 million over the life of the parliament.
"I have tried to be fair, and that's because I respect the institution of parliament," Mr Beattie said in Cairns.
"Sure, there'll be criticism from a lot of people for doing that, but I'm about giving this state a parliament that will work."
In Brisbane Mr Feldman said: "At this stage I've been led to believe the National Coalition have something like 20 staff and Mr Beattie plans to offer us five."
Mr Feldman said Labor got 38 per cent of the vote in the recent state election, and the next major political party with the highest vote was One Nation with 25 per cent.
"I can't see why a coalition that had less votes than we had has more staff," Mr Feldman said.
"I cannot see Mr Beattie's fairness. At this stage, I think it has put paid to his high moral ground."
Mr Feldman said until he spoke to National Party leader Rob Borbidge and Liberal leader David Watson he would not know their resource allocations.
"But surely what One Nation is allocated must fall somewhere between the Liberals and somewhere between what the Nationals have been given," he said.
"There's two big bullies in the sand pit and they don't want to play with the third kid in the sandpit.
"They've got to start learning to play with the new kid," Mr Feldman said.
Indigenous Working Group adviser Noel Pearson says both the Prime Minister and Senator Brian Harradine deserve credit for their willingness to compromise on native title.
"Departing from his sacred covenants at Longreach, the Prime Minister has got to be given credit for that," Mr Pearson said.
"But full credit to Senator Harradine for having promised us that he was going to hold the line - and in substantial measure in relation to the threshold test, in relation to the sunset clause, in relation to the Racial Discrimination Act and in relation to a right to negotiate on pastoral leases - he's surely held the line."
Western Australian Premier Richard Court welcomed the compromise agreement reached with Senator Harradine.
Mr Court says Western Australia has most to gain from workable native title legislation.
He says the Prime Minister is to be commended for persevering with the negotiations to try to make the legislation workable.
"The two key areas for us in Western Australia have been the ambit claims and the unfettered right to negotiate that those claims have had," he said.
"And these proposals go a long way to addressing those issues."
By PETER CRAVEN
I WOULD not have thought anything I saw on television could make me think Pauline Hanson was maligned but last Wednesday night it happened on Wildside, in my book far and away the best Australian drama series on television.
This has happened not long after the Communications Minister, Senator Richard Alston _ quite wrongly I think _ accused the ABC of political bias over coverage of the maritime dispute, and at a time when he is busily placating Brian Harradine's moral conservatism in a way that makes me fearful for Wildside, with its frank and brutal depiction of hard drugs and prostitution, a world of sleaze and sorrow.
Last week's episode was appalling. We were presented with a far-right political leader with an anti-Aboriginal and anti-Asian agenda whose political adviser has her young son kidnapped in order to arouse sympathy for Carol Wilson (as she is called) in the byelection she is fighting.
At the end it is left ambiguous whether the Hanson-like politician has colluded in this criminal abuse of her son but there is absolutely no doubt that she has gained from it politically.
The script for this episode was not written by one of the series' regular writers but by Bob Ellis, and it was both crude and simplistic.
The offensiveness was heightened at every point by the writer's attempt not simply to depict a figure who was loosely like Hanson in policies but to ram home the actual identification in the minds of an audience who are extraordinarily familiar with her.
The very name Carol Wilson is a Frank Hardy-like emulation of the original's name: Anglo-Saxon given name and surname, two syllables in each.
And so it goes with the criminal political adviser who is not only bald, in the manner of Hanson's former adviser, John Pasquarelli, but has a non-Anglo-Saxon (Polish) surname.
Particular details may not seem to mean a great deal in themselves but the cumulative effect suggests that Ellis deliberately worked to make the picture as compulsively offensive as possible in its unmistakable portrait of the Hanson figure.
One of the piquancies of Hanson's life is that this scourge of multiculturalism was at one point married to a European. It's hard not to imagine this having prompted Ellis to equip Carol Wilson with a former Jewish husband and to present her highly sympathetic mother-in-law saying, persuasively, that she was a bad mother with no interest in her child until he could be exploited as part of her political campaign.
Ellis' episode of Wildside displays a naive, left liberal self-righteousness, and concomitant naivete. Not only does the crooked, bald-headed adviser fake an Aboriginal-sounding voice while leaving threatening messages, but an Aboriginal activist is actually arrested, on very slender evidence, largely because of preposterously out-of-date and corny Black Power rhetoric.
Everything in the script is subordinated to nailing the figure whose adviser, in the TV show, says is a ``drongo'' (like Pasquarelli, he sees himself as the manager manipulating the dumb star).
I find it sadder than I can say that a series that has created such a moody and atmospheric image of inner-urban Sydney, which has presented the complex human face of all manner of addictions and degradations, and has at the same time had a likeable, moody group of central figures rendered in the most impressive ``improvisational'' acting style in the history of Australian television should sink to this hackneyed, melodramatic, calumniating cartoon of a politician.
It is a profoundly illiberal and unhelpful piece of propaganda done in the name of liberalism.
ABC programming did not allow the episode to be shown before the Queensland election.
There was also pressure in the opposite direction: reportedly Aaron Pedersen, who plays the young, part-black lawyer, Vince, resigned from the show because of the ban and was persuaded to stay only because producer Ben Gannon intervened.
The mistake was to show this episode at all. The impression it would give any middling shrewd One Nation supporter is that the ABC (and the kind of people who are maintained by it as writers and actors and producers) are sufficiently unscrupulous and contemptuous of the electorate that they will use any level of character assassination to damage a political foe.
I don't doubt that there is everything to be feared politically from Hanson, but the Ellis episode of Wildside told viewers they can feel totally satisfied in hating people such as Hanson and Pasquarelli.
The most disturbing thing about it is that it makes one wonder if we have any instinctive respect for free speech, or whether a stupid and sentimental conformism doesn't harm our every try.
Why did Barbara Hazelton telephone that dry old John Stone last Wednesday-week ago to tell him she had resigned? He was a former secretary to the Treasury, and a former National Party senator for Queensland. Has she asked for a senate spot there too?
The woman has delusions of grandeur. And a case of sour grapes even worse than that poor silly Helen Sham Ho.
Subject: One Nation Dissidents
It really is quite simple, "If I can't control it then I will destroy it".
Now just add the names....Whiteside, Hazelton, Pasquarelli, Archer, Taylor, McDermott, etc. etc. etc.
Just look at every last one of them. Tripping over their own feet to get to the media and their thirty pieces of silver. Every single one of them a plant. Not one of them working for Australia. Every one of them working for what they could personally gain from it. Will they ever find peace? I doubt it.
Allan W. Doak
We are Qantas customers who wish to view articles about Pauline Hanson during in flight NEWS presentations.
If this is not possible please advise us by email so that we can book our future flights with Ansett
We intend to request our family & friends to do the same
Robert & Heather Brandt
Subject: Wik Bill Confusion
Dear Sir, As usual it seems that conflicting messages are the order of the day, where our national policy issues are concerned. I can only speak from the limited exposure Ive had to the Wik changes so far and that is Wed nights 7.30 report. That program certainly left me confused. Howard spoke at the press conference and blow me down, he sounded like he had found a One Nation press release about the matter and was quoting verbatim." Equal treatment of all Australians regardless of race" was repeated enough times to get through even the thickest of skulls.........Ray Martin and Laurie Oaks,were you listening?
(Amazing what the threat of political annihilation will do to a bloke ,isn't it?)
Anyway it sounded to me like Howard was saying the right to negotiate had gone,(that no group of Australians had any rights to negotiate that others did not have) the sunset clause had gone and the registration threshold was higher,etc. Oh yeah, and something about the Racial Discrimination Act.(what could be more racially discriminatory than the Native Title Act!) Then the focus shifted to Noel Pearson for his views.
Far from acting like someone who had lost the "vital" right to negotiate ,Pearson was beaming as he pronounced what he said was "a right to negotiate ,like a wolf in sheeps clothing."!.. or was it the other way around? he saw the other points as positives, on first reading, for aboriginal interests.
He then however proceeded to enlighten us ,in the true spirit of reconciliation and tolerance ,that if things didn't turn out as he saw them ,we would be seeing constant legal challenges and endless litigation to fight the Bill . This would provide further bonanza times to the circling packs of his brother lawyers , he swaggeringly mused.
You would think he might be a little more circumspect about the prospect of expending more and more ,huge amounts of money in the high court circus, but then I suppose its much easier if you're spending some other mugs dough ,rather than your own.
After seeing the program and feeling ,well , confused, it struck me that the whole thing reeked of self interest and that we've probably been sold another lemon.
The parties have merely looked after themselves, rather than solve the problem for the vast majority of Australians whom it is costing in all sorts of ways.
Howard hopes to have avoided his political slaughter in an early election after further compromise of his promises in Rockhampton and elsewhere and Harradine has somehow come up with a Claytons right to negotiate to placate his dancing partners. Add in the questionable State /Federal compensation package that no one seems to understand ,apart from some guarantee that WA will get relief from payouts of future acts and it seems like everybody has hopped in for a piece of the damper . The only ones left dangling are of course the people who fund the whole bloody fiasco. Us. We can be sure that this will cost us plenty. Just like it has done already.
If this exercise has, in fact , left the way open for more of the same it ,just strengthens Pauline Hansons right to leadership of the country with the commonsense platform of totally abolishing Native Title and its myriad offspring and starting afresh.
After all ,if the aboriginal industry is going to go to the courts over it all again to challenge every nuance of interpretation, as they have already done, what have we got to lose?
Subject: English for Australia
ATTENTION; Mr. Allan Jones- Channel Nine
We always look forward to hearing your pertinent comments. Regarding the one about the necessity for English to be used in all business book-keeping, may I point out what you probably already know.
It is this. In India, the main language studied by those aspiring to higher education and good careers in Government and Commerce, is always English. That country boasts of scores of languages. Children at the age of three, are sent to Pre-School and commence an arduous task of learning to read, write, speak and do arithmetic in English.
Look at Singapore. Its main educational language is English. In late years, Mandarin has been added. Then there is Malaysia. Until a few years ago, all education was in English. Then the system switched to Malay. At that time, I knew an Indian Headmistress of a large school. She and many of her teachers did not know Malay, yet they had to go through the motions so that all teaching was in Malay.
Thailand - many speak English, as also in the Philippines, and Hong Kong . English as all know, is the universal language for Science, education, communication and commerce and industry.
Regarding Indonesia, that country has had millions of ethnic Chinese for centuries. About forty years ago, they forbad all teaching and even the importation of books in Mandarin. Everything had to be in the national language, Indonesian.
What is wrong with Australia? Where is its common sense, that the Government should do as you have disclosed and allow books to be kept in languages other than English? It would also be a good idea if all migrants had to learn and know English. This is an English speaking country and should remain so.
Peter & Irene Faulkes
Subject: A Current Affair
Tonight Mr.Ray Martin got a bit of his own back. About time too. As I said before, there is nothing wrong with One Nation policies so do not defend them attack with them.
Please pass this on if you can.
Could I suggest you make an official complaint to the Press Council of Aust. They may or may not be too sympathetic but it is a good way of at least making an irresponsible media outlet accountable to some degree The council is certainly obliged to deal with complaints.
If a complaint is upheld, newspapers are required to publish a report. I'm not sure what the case is with TV, but I think the case is published in print media anyway.
I agree with Pauline Hanson's views. I am a married women and I lost my job because of the Liberal changes to the workers comp laws. If I was Aboriginal or Asian this would never have happened, because I could have suited my Employer for discrimination. As it stands I am a white indigenous person(yes, I was born here) and I and my Husband will be out of a place to live soon because we are not entitled to any form of financial help from the Government even though between both of us we have been paying tax for the last 30 years. To me this is totally unfair. Aboriginals get assistance to do anything and everything they want. The Asians come in the boat load and use our system to the extreme. They form their gangs, import their drugs and the list goes on. I will vote for your party if your party does not go to bed with the Liberals as senator Harradine and Lightfoot have. The Liberal Government is the most anti family and anti worker Government I have ever encountered in all my voting days and I am proud to say that I have never given them my vote. It is about time for change and I honestly hope that your party can do this with out linking with the so called major parties.
CANNINGTON WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Subject: Be fair
Im not a citizen of your country, but I must tell you, stop having feelings of White guilt, stop being ashamed of being White. All races have blood on their hands, all have committed crimes against other people, not just Whites. If White political leaders won't look out for our race who will? Don't we have a right to survive?
From a citizen of the USA. Where Whites are becoming extinct because of racial treason, racial guilt, and just plain cowardice. Unless you act now the same will happen to you...
Aurora IL USA
Another perfect day in paradise.
Have a good one.
Name site is owned by One
Recent stories exclusive to (how to) subscribe/rs of the Australian National News of the Day:
The Barbara Hazelton
betrayal - 2nd July 1998
Pauline Hanson's One Nation Queensland State MPs meet in Parliament - 27th June 1998
QANTAS censor Pauline Hanson - 24th June 1998
"Paul" (Big "K") Costello's lies - 22nd June 1998
Live coverage of Queensland State Elections - 13th June 1998
Beattie's preference lies exposed - 11th June 1998
Launch of One Nation state policies - 8th June 1998
Sixty Minutes break new barriers in unethical reporting - 6th June 1998
Ray Martin revelas his spots when challenging Pauline Hanson on A Current Affair - 4th June 1998
The backlash to Ray Martin's unethical behaviour during his interview with Pauline Hanson.- 4th June 1998
See GLOBE International for
other world news.