Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Australia Censorship The Internet Politics Your Rights Online

Australian Greens Demand Public Access To Cloak and Dagger Anti-Piracy Meetings 93

Fluffeh writes "Continuing the recent stories on the secret, closed door, FOI blocked talks, the Australian Greens have filed a motion in the Senate requesting that the Government release documents regarding its closed door meetings on Internet piracy which the Attorney-General's Department has blocked from being released under Freedom of Information laws. This morning, Greens Communications Spokesperson Scott Ludlam filed an order in the Senate that the Government disclose details of the most recent meeting. 'The Government refuses to reveal almost any information about the attendees, the substance or the outcomes of the meeting,' he said in a separate statement. 'A Freedom of Information request from a journalist looks like it's been met with maximum resistance.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Australian Greens Demand Public Access To Cloak and Dagger Anti-Piracy Meetings

Comments Filter:
  • At last... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by FriendlyLurker ( 50431 ) on Thursday March 22, 2012 @05:27AM (#39438455)
    An Aussie political party with some cojones.
    • by mjwx ( 966435 )

      An Aussie political party with some cojones.

      As a result, they are the most hated and reviled party in Australia.

      I'll admit it, I voted Green last election. I did so for two reasons.
      1) I'm under 40 with no kids, who in the major parties cares about me.
      2) They are the only party in Australia with an interest in rights and freedoms.

      The Greens at least have a public friendly agenda and some healthy fear of the electorate.

      Now I'm waiting for the inevitable hate barrage from angry Liberal (Big L) supporters. I've got my environmentally friendly

      • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

        I've gone one step further, I have become a member rather passive of course but I do provide funding support. The Greens seem to be the only party who to stand up against corporations, not bow to foreign governments and adhere to their stated principles.

        To me the Greens seem more honest in their being conservative, seeking to conserve the environment, conserve resources and conserve the people.

        I can't get over how the psuedo conservative parties get away with calling themselves conservatives, when they

  • by master_p ( 608214 ) on Thursday March 22, 2012 @05:34AM (#39438481)

    Actually, they never were.

    if democracy could change things, it would be outlawed.

    • Actually, they never were.

      if democracy could change things, it would be outlawed.

      And yet, quite strangely it would seem, many that share your opinion want a larger, more powerful government.

      Not saying you, personally, do. I just find it to be a major reality-disconnect when people who complain about the government expanding it's powers, spying on the domestic populace, commonly employing military-style strike teams on individual civilians not convicted or suspected of a major/violent crime, and taking away their rights and abusing them in general, turn right around and vote for those po

      • What makes mob rule so much worse then a rule of corrupt politicians? Both will disregard the wishes of anyone outside 'their' group, and at least when you're trying to bribe the mob you have to give something to most of the nation, rather then just a few individuals.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I'd dare say that mob rule is often even more dangerous. Especially when the mob is emotional.

          • Historical note: It was "mob rule" that removed Charles I (by decapitating him) when he attempted to usurp legislative power from Parliament (hence to remove legislative power from the People) in 1649.
            It was "mob rule" that caused the Government to repeal Poll Tax (although they got their own back by calling it something else) in 1990.

            "Mob rule" is merely the intimidation of legitimate authorities (notwithstanding the lawfulness, or lack thereof, of their actions), used as a perjorative form of majoritarian

        • In a Republic, aka "rule by corrupt politicians", you can create a system of laws and customs in an attempt to limit the action of those politicians. For example you can install an independent judiciary and charge them with enforcing a bill of rights. The voter's role is not so much in deciding policy but in providing a check on those who decide policy. In practice true democracy is unrestricted tyranny of the masses. Where pretty much anything the masses vote for becomes law. Lets just say it is much b
          • Perhaps society needs a little chaos. It seems to me that most western republics seem stuck. What you call a coherent policy is little more than ensuring the status quo. The only things that seem to matter are ensuring the politician's re-election. Which principally means keeping the big donors happy by making sure laws favor them.

            And sure, people have the chance to elect someone else every 4 years or so. But who can they choose from? Only a small pool of candidates with enough money to get on TV. And after

        • What makes mob rule so much worse then a rule of corrupt politicians?

          Well, that's sort of the point, then, isn't it?

          First, citizens allow government size and power to grow which results in corruption, then the mob rises up and kills the corrupt politicians and cronies, then the mob's attentions run wherever the mob-rage of the moment takes them. That's been the historical pattern.

          And yet, many people are screaming to expand the size and power of the government even more, resulting in corruption becoming correspondingly worse, and bringing on the mobs and widespread violent a

          • Crap!

            Sometimes I think that there may be people in government working towards this as a way to somehow seize power & control, and that they imagine that they will somehow be able to tame the mobs and use them to their personal ends.


    • by blahplusplus ( 757119 ) on Thursday March 22, 2012 @07:11AM (#39438779)

      "Actually, they never were."

      Except for roads, electrification, water and sewage, healthcare (outside the US), and the social safety net??? To say government doesn't govern at least somewhat in the interests of the people is a lie. The issue has always been the people do nothing to change things until the proverbial shit hits the fan (great depression).

      • I don't think the Government was acting in the best interests of the People at all in the lead up to the Great Depression. Particularly given that it was Government policy at the time that banks could operate uninsured (so when the 9,000-odd banks failed during the 30's all the accounts disappeared without trace), coupled with the consolidation of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury and their legislated authority to print unbacked debt notes, the legislated high tariffs on imports causing artificially redu

      • Sounds like the Life of Brian

        Reg: But apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, viniculture, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh-water system, and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?
        PFJ Member: Brought peace?
        Reg: Oh, peace? Shut up!
    • by Pecisk ( 688001 )

      It is very easy to say something outrageous and stereotypical. I think Estonian or Fin would disagree with you. They certanly don't sing hymns for their goverments, but they that they're trying their best.

      Problem with UK and US citizens that they are weaklings - they are mirroring their "lobby democracy expierence" to rest of the world, and think it's unbeatable. Because ohh, life is too short, and you're already one payement short for your house loan. Run, critter, run.

      Guess what, it all takes to just stop

  • by Tastecicles ( 1153671 ) on Thursday March 22, 2012 @05:54AM (#39438541)

    If it involves stifling creativity, removing our rights, or otherwise telling us that we can't do what we previously *could*, then it most certainly does not warrant PII.

  • How to assist this (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Who do we petition or write to to make this a reality?

This login session: $13.76, but for you $11.88.