otb,

"Fox, "wall of secrecy"

Bollocks!...."

Of course it's a wall of secrecy - why else rush through legislation of this kind?

Tell me why Australia's detention centres are subject to laws that are the antithesis of those legislated for children who reside on Australian soil?

http://aifs.gov.au/cfca/publications/mandatory-reporting-child-abuse-and-neglect

"Mandatory reporting is a term used to describe the legislative requirement imposed on selected classes of people to report suspected cases of child abuse and neglect to government authorities. Parliaments in all Australian states and territories have enacted mandatory reporting laws of some description..."

"Who is mandated to make a notification?

The legislation generally contains lists of particular occupations that are mandated to report. The groups of people mandated to notify cases of suspected child abuse and neglect range from persons in a limited number of occupations (e.g., Qld), to a more extensive list (Vic.), to a very extensive list (ACT, NSW, SA, Tas.), through to every adult (NT). The occupations most commonly named as mandated reporters are those who deal frequently with children in the course of their work: teachers, doctors, nurses, and police..."

"What protections are given to reporters?

In all jurisdictions, the legislation protects the reporter's identity from disclosure. In addition, the legislation provides that as long as the report is made in good faith, the reporter cannot be liable in any civil, criminal or administrative proceeding."

Btw, there's a small battalion of lawyers and QCs volunteering up front to represent pro bono anyone who is charged under this new law.

I'm too tired to continue to
argue with anyone.

I find it all too depressing.

I fear that our country has lost its way under
the current policies that are so unnecessarily
cruel and harsh - and our political world has become
obsessed with the problems of aggression, and fear,
that it allows compassion and fairness to
be regarded as soft and weak. Yet our survival depends on their
dominance.

See you all on another thread.

Dearest Foxy,

Take courage ! Change horses - now the way is more clear to campaign for an increased quota of genuine refugees - Syrians, Rohingya, Eritreans, Sudanese - people who are both destitute AND desperate. Stick to your principles, if one of them is genuine concern for refugees, as I'm sure it is.

Just leave the stick-up-Abbott's-@rse opportunist politics to those less decent than yourself. And yes, they know who they are.

Love,

Joe

Poirot,

The left whingers irritate me so much because they make ignorance an art form. The part of the border force act that applies to information applies to those employed by the immigration dept. Not to reporters, or anyone else. It is also worth noting that anyone employed in the public service or private sector that releases confidential information from his employer is subject to instantaneous dismissal and sometimes even criminal or civil claims.

"Former defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon kicked it off by saying Labor might want to embrace all available tools to prevent a restart in the people-smuggling trade. “Now, one of those tools currently is boat turn-backs,” he said, “Personally, I believe turn-backs will remain part of Labor policy.”

In a rational world this would have been an insignificant statement of the obvious. Fitzgibbon was merely urging his party to promise what it pledged in 2007 (but failed to implement) and now would amount only to continuing what the government already was doing successfully.

Realists see an issue of border security, immigration integrity, 1200 lost lives, 800 boats, 52,000 unauthorised arrivals, overflowing detention centres and refugees who, without cash for people-smugglers, can’t access a full ­humanitarian quota.

Labor, urged on by activists and the political class, refuses to learn the lessons of our asylum-seeker horror story. So, while the boats have been stopped and most voters have breathed a sigh of relief, we have had another chapter in the parlour game that is Labor’s internal contortion on boats.

"Perhaps it’s good for Labor not to have an asylum-seeker policy, because who will believe it when it does?"

Paul,

What is a word that describes the greens' obsession with a few children? Is it pedophilia?

Here we go...

"Just leave the stick-up-Abbott's-@rse opportunist politics to those less decent than yourself...."

Of course it's fundamentally "decent" to uproot babies from facilities in Australia and fly them over to the loving embrace of humid and mouldy tents in Nauru - apparently Australia isn't losing its humanity at all - and it's all down to people wanting to "stick-up-Abbott's-@rse"

Thanks for that, Loudmouth.

But let's examine your patronising banter to Foxy. Which other gentlemen on OLO choose to deploy a sarcastic and sexist mode to address fellow poster's on this forum?

Um?

Nope...can't think of any other chaps around here who choose your particular line of disingenuous communication to get their jollies.

Here are your most recent terms of endearment to Foxy.

"Dearest Foxy....Love, Joe"

"Dearest Foxy....Love forever, Joe"

"Dearest Foxy....Love always, Joe"

"Dearest Foxy....Love, Joe"

"Dear Foxy...Love, Joe"

"Dear Foxy....Love, Joe"

"Dear Foxy...Thank you, Foxy, Love always, Joe"

"Dearest Foxy....Love, Joe"

"Dear Foxy...Love, Joe"

"Dearest darling Foxy...Love always, Joe"

"Dear Foxy...Love, Joe"

"Dearest Foxy...Getting to know me better ? If you play your cards right ......Much love, Joe"

"Dear sweet Foxy....Joe"

Etc.....

I'll have to admit that employing those terms on a public forum like OLO to communicate with one particular female poster - whom you don't know personally - is novel (and your posts are often dripping with sarcastic intent)

I wonder why all the other men around here desist from such disingenuous embroidery when interacting here? Could it be that they possess a little more decorum, and prefer to treat posters as individuals and not someone to have a little sexist fun and games with?

If I didn't know better, I would classify it as creepy sexist trolling...but then....

SM,

You're an interesting poster.

Off you go making your case which is always succinct and well-written, seemingly mature and well composed - I might not usually agree with your stance, but I appreciate your articulate presentation.

And then periodically you write things such as:

"What is a word that describes the greens' obsession with a few children? Is it pedophilia?"

I mean - why?

It's just silly and immature.

".... It is also worth noting that anyone employed in the public service or private sector that releases confidential information from his employer is subject to instantaneous dismissal and sometimes even criminal or civil claims."

Could you enlighten me as to why this clause is included in the legislation for mandatory reporting of suspected child abuse?

"In all jurisdictions, the legislation protects the reporter's identity from disclosure. In addition, the legislation provides that as long as the report is made in good faith, the reporter cannot be liable in any civil, criminal or administrative proceeding."