Monday 23 February 2015

Muslim leaders outraged by Tony Abbott's chiding over extremism

Muslim leaders outraged by Tony Abbott's chiding over extremism

Muslim leaders outraged by Tony Abbott's chiding over extremism






Islamic leaders are furious at the prime minister’s suggestion that the community does not do enough to stamp out extremism











Randa Kattan



The head of the Arab Council of Australia, Randa Kattan, has said the
comments were “promoting hatred and inflaming racism”. Photograph: Nikki
Short/AAP



Muslim leaders are furious at Tony Abbott’s suggestion that the
community does not do enough to stamp out extremism, saying the
statement is the “last card” of an embattled leader who is using
dog-whistle politics to “inflame racism”.



On Monday Abbott delivered a speech on national security,
in which he said: “I’ve often heard western leaders describe Islam as a
‘religion of peace’. I wish more Muslim leaders would say that more
often, and mean it.”



The head of the Arab Council of Australia, Randa Kattan, said the comments were “promoting hatred and inflaming racism”.


Kattan said she had seen a sharp increase in racism levelled at Muslim Australians since the Martin Place siege in Sydney last year, and that the comments by the prime minister are “dog-whistling to the racists out there”.


“It’s not helpful, it’s divisive. It labels our community as being
responsible for the actions of a few,” Kattan said. “It’s not helpful
for anyone to make these statements … How much more can we condemn?”



At least one organisation has announced it will boycott a government
consultation session on deradicalisation programs scheduled for Monday
evening over Abbott’s remarks.



Zaahir Edries, the president of the Muslim Legal Network, said the
group particularly objected to the prime minister’s comment that Muslim
leaders should promote Islam as a religion of peace more often.



Advertisement
“This
clearly shows that the government has not engaged in sincere and
genuine communication with the Muslim community. We have incessantly
denounced violence and encouraged peace, not simply as a responsive
measure but because those are our core religious beliefs,” he said.
“Consequently, we are of the view that tonight will not be genuine
consultation with our community and we will advise our community of our
reasons for non-attendance.”



The head of the Lebanese Muslim association, Samier Dandan, said the
community “has had enough” of the prime minister using national security
as a way of “scapegoating” Muslims.



“This is your last card, prime minister, your last card to save your career.”


He told Guardian Australia that Abbott is blaming other leaders for his electoral unpopularity.


“Stop asking us what we’ve done [to stamp out extremism],” Dandan
said. “Mr Prime Minister, what have you and your government done?”



He said the community had done everything it could, other than
getting “a tattoo imprinted on our forehead” to condemn violent
extremism.



“He’s living in his own cocoon where he wants to look for scapegoats,” Dandan said.


The foreign minister, Julie Bishop, stepped back from Abbott’s statements in question time on Monday.


“I want to applaud members of our Muslim community here in Australia
who are taking a stand against extremism and working with the
government, with mosques and community groups to keep our people safe,”
Bishop said.



Sheikh Mohamadu Nawas Saleem, spokesman for the Australian national
imams council, said the prime minister’s statements failed to take into
account the “silent, behind the curtains” efforts of Muslim leaders to
eradicate terrorism.



“I’m sure imams around Australia collectively already speak out
against Daesh,” Saleem told Guardian Australia. “What we said against
violent extremism, we meant.” Daesh is another term used to refer to
Islamic State.



The sheikh said that community intervention had worked better than the security agencies in identifying radicals.


“It is because of the efforts of imams that Australia is safe,”
Saleem said, adding that Abbott’s comments “demonise Muslims at large”.



The imams’ council has regular meetings with the attorney general’s
department, police and security agencies on how to identify people who
could fall into the clutches of terrorism and work against it.



Saleem said this collaboration has been working well, but there is always more that could be done.


The government initially set aside $13.4m over four years to fund
community engagement programs as part of its counter-terrorism strategy,
but only $1m was set aside in 2014-15 for the program.



Individual groups can receive grants of up to $50,000 each, which some groups say is not enough.


“Is the government serious about solving this problem, or is this just to inflame racism?” Kattansaid.


Wednesday 11 February 2015

Has privatisation passed its use-by date? - The AIM Network

Has privatisation passed its use-by date? - The AIM Network



Has privatisation passed its use-by date?














On Q&A last Monday, RBA board member Heather Ridout expressed her disappointment at the decision by the voters of Queensland to reject the Newman government’s privatisation plans.


Whether it has been noticed or not, that election result coupled with
the recent elections in Victoria and Greece share a common denominator
that may have far reaching ramifications for future governments all over
the OECD world.



The Victorian and Queensland elections were fought primarily on the
issues of infrastructure and privatisation. There were other issues in
the background but these two took centre stage for most of their
respective campaigns.



If you were to combine these two issues and express them as one
broader concern for voters, it is likely that concern would be
identified as sentiment; a feeling that selling off assets and allowing
private companies to buy public utilities that result in costing users
more, wasn’t right.



Austerity has been the catch cry in recent times with governments
telling us that our present lifestyle is no longer sustainable. They
then encourage the privatisation of public assets as if this somehow
benefits us.



moneyWhen
politicians look at publicly owned assets, all they see is a pile of
money sitting there waiting to be collected. They think if that pile of
money can be realised without effecting the service it performs, then
why not sell it and spend the money on something that will make them
look good.



They then try to sell the idea to the public who are led to believe
that this will improve their lives and those of future generations.

But it never seems to work out this way. We have seen public assets pass
from our hands into the hands of the already wealthy time and time
again, without ever seeing any tangible reward.



Has the sale of Telstra, the Commonwealth Bank and the State
Electricity Commission of Victoria, just to name a few improved our
quality of life?



Looking at the result of these three elections it is worthwhile
asking: Are we seeing a wiser electorate waking up to the hypocrisy
peddled about privatisation?



In Greece, a country that has been cheated, lied to and then forced
to pay the price of neo-liberal excesses by both their own government
and the EU Parliament, the people decided enough was enough.



Again, it was sentiment, a feeling they had been punished enough, if
indeed, they should have been punished at all. In all three locations
the people judged privatisation, austerity and structural reform to be a
smoke screen hiding the real agenda behind these moves.



That is not to say the people’s understanding of the real agenda is
crystal clear either. But they do understand that the flow of wealth to
the top end of town, at their expense, is real. Public assets are
generally always undervalued.



powerThey
could clearly see that their living standards were in decline while
politicians, developers and corporate giants effused a smug arrogance
reminiscent of the Frank Underwood character in “House of Cards”.



They decided in all three cases they weren’t going to take it
anymore. It begs the question therefore: Is the public perception of
neo-liberal philosophy now clearer and are the people finally beginning
to reject it?



Unregulated capitalism has always been at odds with those basic human
values that we hold in common; fairness, honesty, sympathy, charity,
empathy. The notion that people come before profit, was somehow cast
aside when the money train left the station and big capital promised big
rewards for all; rewards they never intended to share.



If we can take a lesson from Victoria, Greece and Queensland, it is
that big capital will have to re-assess the way it treats its most
valuable resource: the people who make it work for them.



capitalThe challenge for the new governments in Australia now, is to explain this to big capital.


But if our local business writers continue to suggest as Adele Ferguson of The Age does that, “With
an infrastructure backlog and big budget deficits, we can build the
infrastructure we need only by selling assets and attracting private
capital”,
then there is still a long way to go.



Meanwhile, more governments will fall unexpectedly because they ignored public sentiment in favour of private gain.