Rudd's Orwellian Regime

There was a disturbing story in the Daily Telegraph two days ago. Steve Lewis reported that the Rudd government reserved the right to vet government funded communications between MPs and their constituents.

In a move that has incensed MPs, Commonwealth bureaucrats are exploiting new laws that allow them to ban newsletters being sent to voters.

Using Orwellian-type powers, they are putting a black mark through words such as "dreadful", "mismanagement" and "incompetence" - declaring they can no longer be used because they criticise government policy.

The new laws which came into effect on October 1 deliver a big advantage to the Government in the election year.

Senior ministers are even able to access material from Coalition MPs and the minor parties before they are mailed to voters.

The crackdown follows the Auditor-General's criticism of the $300 million parliamentary entitlements scheme.

This is beyond belief. It can’t be right, can it?

UPDATE:

I made enquiries of an ALP MHR who gave me the following reply:

The Telegraph story that you have referred to has arisen out of some changes to Parliamentary entitlements. Essentially, the issue is that a Member of Parliament is not permitted to incorporate party political comment into publications printed at taxpayers' expense.

The details of these requirements are contained in the attached Ministerial Circular and Q & A attachment.

The circular was released by the Special Minister of State following his press release:

http://www.smos.gov.au/media/2009/mr_352009.html

This press release was issued in response to the findings of the ANAO in the attached report.

http://www.anao.gov.au/uploads/documents/2009-10_ANAO_Audit_Report_3_.pdf

It is worth noting that an MP only has to comply with these requirements when using taxpayer funded entitlements.

I'll think of that every time I pass one of those school signs that must be kept up until after the next election.

This sounds like doublespeak to me. If this is the approach to be taken, politicians need to be given great latitude as to what they might say. They should certainly be allowed to criticise government policy in the most trenchant terms. Quoting Hansard clearly should be exempt from this regulation.

Self Censorship - The Soft Jihad

A German publisher has decided not to publish a novel out of fear for the safety of himself, his family and his employees.

Surely he knows that Islam is a religion of peace, and that only a very tiny minority of misunderstanders of Islam would resort to violence, so he has nothing to fear, right?

The novel was about an honour killing, obviously a topic wholly unrelated to Islam. The offending words were "You can shove your Koran up your arse". My thoughts exactly.

Censorship at Stanford

Stanford university has banned a filmmaker from using footage of an interview he conducted with an academic who had moved from a global cooling alarmist position in the 1970s to a warming alarmist position now.

In the 1970s there was widespread panic in the scientific community (which flowed through into the popular press) about the threat of global cooling.

It would be interesting to hear an interview with a scientist involved in both incidents. Stanford is doing everything it can to prevent this.

Kevin Rudd's Censorship Regime

This is staggering:

VICTORIAN principals are being forced by the Brumby Government to sign contracts promising not to speak out against Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's computers-in-schools policy — or risk losing tens of thousands of dollars in funding.

It is absolutely unbelievable that Rudd would think he could get away with this. He is trying to shut down criticism by punishing school-kids. If anybody doubted Rudd's overweening arrogance, doubt no longer.

This thin-skinned bullyboy needs a good boot up the bum!