part 3
People’s Bank - just another “bad” policy from One Nation?

Anyone remember when the Commonwealth Bank was the “People’s” Bank? The idea was that the Australian people’s money was to be made available at low
interest for appropriate job producing development. This great idea, which also happens to have been One Nation policy from its very beginning. It was an idea, repeatedly attacked by the Howard Government and others, yet now that AXA has announced their joint venture in banking, the critics are suddenly silent.

New Zealand liked the idea enough to start their own "people's" bank.

On page 15 of the One Nation policy Blue Book. A People’s Bank is not a profit making entity, but a responsible use of nationally owned funds to finance productive development in the interest of the Australian people.

The Australian Government has the capacity to create a “People’s” Bank but the Liberal Coalition and the Labor Party are very reliant on donations from the major banks and of course they wouldn’t want to create much needed competition for their donors: would they

Curfew or hypocrisy?

Remember the ridicule and the hue and cry when Pauline Hanson mentioned the word CURFEW?

Take a look at this then... Today Tonight, Councillor calls for youth curfew, May 23 2003. "When the sun goes down Australia's favourite holiday playground turns into a violent hotspot. Now one local councillor on Queensland's Gold Coast is calling for a curfew on teenagers in a bid to curb the violence. Cr McDonald wants teenagers banned from being out after 10pm."

The 7:30 Report, 30/06/2003. Opinions differ on Northbridge curfew. “The WA Government has introduced a curfew to get young people off the streets of Perth's entertainment district. The curfew came into effect on Saturday night, giving police the power to remove anyone under the age of 16 from the streets of Northbridge, whether they're breaking the law or simply
hanging out with friends.”

The Associated Press September 4, 2003. Brogden calls for u-14 curfew. “A curfew to keep children under 14 off the streets after 10pm should be tried in NSW, Opposition leader John Brogden said today.”

“Mr Brogden used his opening statement to the Summit on Alcohol Abuse in state parliament to repeat a call he made during a trip to rural NSW last month. "I don't think there is anything wrong in saying parents of 11-, 12-, and 14-year-olds should know where their children are. And, if they're out on the streets late at night, they should be taken to a community facility where their parent, parents or guardian should be called to collect them," he said. ”How can any parent or any organisation justify children under 14 on the streets late at night."

So other people can call for curfews. State Labor (W.A.) can actually bring one in and a State Liberal Leader (N.S.W.) can call for it. Just as long as it isn't Pauline Hanson or One Nation. You can smell the hypocrisy

Liberals Adopt One Nation Family Law Policy.

One Nation Senator Len Harris has congratulated the government for adopting his party’s policy on family law reform, which would give divorced parents joint custody of their children.

Senator Harris introduced legislation to amend the Family Law Act on 20 June last year. His Family Law Amendment (Joint Residency) Bill 2002 would negate the need for parents to fight for the right to equal parenting. “It’s good to see that the government is actively listening to One Nation, the voice of the people,” Senator Harris said from Canberra today. The government’s announcement yesterday on family law reform strongly reflects Senator Harris’ initiative.

HOWARD GOVERNMENT ADOPTS ANOTHER ONE NATION POLICY.

From the Daily Telegraph of June 2, 2003. "ATSIC will virtually cease to exist under changes recommended by a Government ordered review. Most of the power of the 18 member board will be transferred to "local communities".

ATSIC had a budget previously of $1,200,000,000 (1.2 billion dollars). Last month the Government took away from ATSIC control over its budget."

Pauline Hanson's Maiden Speech, Sept 10, 1996. Over 7 years ago... "This is why I am calling for ATSIC to be abolished. It is a failed, hypocritical and discriminatory
organisation that has failed dismally the people it was meant to serve".

Where is ATSIC today?

From One Nation's Federal site...

The Labor Opposition has said they will save Medicare from the Government. How do they say they will do this? Their current stance is a leaf straight out of One Nation Policy. Our Policy has always been to pursue the best interests of the Australian public as a whole. It makes very clear that funding will be redirected from Private Health Care support. It will be spent in supporting Bulk Billing GPs so that all Australian families can see a Doctor when they need to. One Nation will always preserve the high standards of health care all Australians expect. We will never let it be a case of more money buys better care.

Seems that other Party's do believe in One Nation Policies after all

BACKWARDS LOOKING... they said.

How often did you here the plaintive cry that One Nation was "backward" or “backwards” looking? What did that mean? Was it supposed to be a bad thing?

When we recognise those who have gone before us... is that a bad thing?

When we pay homage to those who have sacrificed their very lives for us... is that a bad thing?

When standards of the past (that are higher than those of today) are aimed for... is that a bad thing?

When past mistakes are recognised... is that a bad thing?

History teaches us valuable lessons... those who ignore the past... risk making the same mistakes. (Over and over... again)

Here is a typical example of an attack by those of the political left:

Quote:
"The Hansonite social vision is profoundly backwards-looking, based on a yearning for the “certainties” of a long gone era.” The vision is a crude one, the main planks of which were Economic Protectionism and the White Australia Policy, which excluded Asians and relegated Aborigines to the margins of white society. Australia was to be a “New Britannia” down under and during the post-war boom of the 1950s and ‘60s it seemed that the goal was reached."

Well, I suppose if you're Liberal supporter, that makes you a Howardite. If your a Labor supporter, (and he's still leader that is) a Creanite. The objectifying, name-calling and arrogant contempt of those who fear One Nation, is obvious. (Update - you'd now be a Lathamite.)

But where is the truth?

Is certainty of... say... employment... a bad thing?

Is... less crime... a bad thing?

Is putting Australians and Australian industries first... a bad thing?

Until Federation each State was a British colony.

The "White Australia policy" existed... it was NOT and is NOT... One Nation policy.

If being a largely British based society is what was meant by "New Britannia," then yes, we were. Even though such a term, may be one used only by the anglophobic.

One Nation doesn’t deny what we were or see it as anything to fear. One Nation’s vision is not of Australia being a “New Britannia” but an Australia... populated
by Australians

The Hanson, or more importantly, the One Nation “social vision” for Australia, is declared in its name... One Nation. With social equality for all Australians

Quote:
"The past is dead. Unemployment was low. Migrants - most of them from Britain and Ireland or western Europe - “knew their place”. Multiculturalism was unheard of and Aboriginals were out of sight and out of mind."

So, is low unemployment... a bad thing?

Is social harmony... a bad thing?

Who wants any Australian, whether aboriginal or not... kept "out of sight and out of mind"... NOT One Nation.

After all, One Nation came into being to give the politically unrepresented a voice.

Economic rationalists say;
Quote:
“Protectionism is a thing of the past. Tariff barriers have to be taken down. Free market, globalisation, deregulation, privatisation, the "level" playing field.”

Economic rationalism has run riot under both Liberal and Labor. Australian manufacturing and other industries have been destroyed. Is that good planning for our future?

One Nation have policies to rebuild Australian manufacturing industries and primary industries.

Value adding to products should be done, by Australians in Australia.

Industries in their infancy benefit from protectionism. This is a well known fact.

Is providing protection for new industries or those yet unable to compete with bigger, older companies backward looking? Or is it building a future for Australia and Australians?

One Nation backed the Union call for “Fair Trade” not “Free Trade.” Did the Unions back One Nation?

One Nation opposed the MAI and opposes GATS. It understands it will undermine Australia’s sovereignty and Australian workers rights. Is this looking backwards?
Or just looking after Australians?

If the major parties had their way the MAI would have been accepted. If they have their way, GATS will be accepted. If that happens then everyone will be looking
back in a few years... wondering how it happened. Will they then say... One Nation was right we should have listened