If you rememeber about 12 mths ago Morris Iemma tried to stop people wearing T-shirts protesting about the Pope's policies.He also tried to ban peaceful protests.If he'd had gotten away with this,how long would it have been before we would not be able to protest against out own Govt.

We have a creeping authoritarian socialism that has mistaken the free market for being the cause of this economic collapse.The free market was not and is not being allowed to operate.The so called toxic debt and failed financial institutions should be liquidated and let the free market determine what is of value.Tax payer borrowed money should not be used to bail out failed institutions.

Bankrupt Govts cannot bail out privately owned failed institutions.Creating more debt to elimate debt is an oxymoron.

We are not only losing our personal freedoms but also our financial ones.

Graham writes

'Certainly the UK bill of rights doesn't appear to have stopped this.'
I doubt whether anyone can name anything positive that the Bill of Rights has done for the UK.

GrahamY: "But Conroy just keeps ploughing ahead."

In the budget monthly expenditure for the DBCDE line item Cyber-Safety is about $3M..$4M / month, except in October/2009 which is $30M. (http://www.dbcde.gov.au/department/governance_and_administration/budget/dbcde_budget_09-10 section 2, table page 42). This is unchanged from last year.
http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/bp2/html/expense-04.htm

In last years budget the $30M was described as:

"From 2009-10, Internet Service Providers will receive a one-off subsidy towards the costs of installing Internet Service Providers filters."

So apparently current trial will be a success, and roll-out will commence in October. I don't know what is driving it, but the fact that Rudd and Conroy are both left leaning Christians keeps springing to mind.

runner: "I doubt whether anyone can name anything positive that the Bill of Rights has done for the UK."

A "Bill of Rights" that isn't part of the constitution isn't worth the paper it is written on.

CJ Morgan: "The unprecedented assaults on civil liberties under the guise of the so-called "War on Terror" in recent years in the USA (under Bush) and in Australia (under Howard) spring to mind..."

The xenophobia under Howard was a bit hard to swallow. But it appeared to me he didn't have his heart in it - it was more political theatre designed to win Pauline Hansen votes. Bush's assaults on the liberties of foreigners at home was unmatched, but the worst erosion of civil liberties on its own civilians occured in the UK, under a labour government. National ID cards http://www.no2id.net/, DNA database http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/3-privacy/dna-database/index.shtml, world's most comprehensive CCTV network http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closed-circuit_television, 28 day detention without charge http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article4075503.ece, illegal to protest within 1km of parliament. It goes on and on.

The same disease seemed to infect all three (Australia, the UK and USA), but I agree with Graham when he says the left seems more comfortable with restricting individual freedoms than the right, as you might expect.

As for this story about the noisy housewife - foxy nailed it. Change the activity from sex to singing I doubt anyone would think what happened was unfair.

I was kept awake in a motel most of the night once by noisy sex next door.

Next morning, I went to remonstrate with the joyful jumpers and saw at the foot of the bed (the rooms had those big sliding doors) through the open curtains a lad who looked about 14 years old, clad in a pair of striped flannelette pj, trousers and built like a rabbit, flexing his muscles at the object of his desire, who was still in bed.

I laughed so much at the sight that I had to get in the car and drive away.

I suspect the article Graham provided is a beat-up and how many of us during sexual romps have said to our partners: "Shssh....the kids will hear" and made sincere efforts to keep the noise down? So why would you want your kids to be listening to someone having sex who lacks the slightest regard for her neighbours?

Noisy sex would be particularly irritating in Britain. Has anyone seen the council flats there? All crammed together with common walls? On the other hand, noisy sex during the day would more tolerable I guess, however, I suspect one driving factor for any complaint would be by those who are kept awake at nights. Sleep deprivation's a serious health hazard, which has been the reason on the odd occasion for the sleep deprived to assault a noisy neighbour!

The real issue here is noise whether it be from sex, loud music or otherwise.

I am not sure how even this, can be made into an ideological statement vis a vis the usual left/right stalwarts.

If we are to keep an open mind without prejudice, surely extremism is prevalent at both ends of this spectrum.

Detaining inmates in Guantanamo Bay was wholly against civil liberties and the right of trial or innocent before proven guilty. It is mainly the religious right screaming out for more regulation in regard to personal freedom gay/lesbian mardi gras, same-sex marriage, sex before marriage etal.

It was the Howard government that made the public service less free with its advice and 'dangerous' for ethical public servants and potential whistleblowers. These were not only threats to civil liberties but the public's right to know in the interests of more open and transparent governments.