November 29, 2003
Utterly disgusting
If Australia looks like following the lead of Canada any time soon, I'm staying right here in Sri Lanka. (thanks to the Gravett server, amongst others, for the link)
Canadian judges soon will be enforcing Islamic law, or Sharia, in disputes between Muslims, possibly paving the way to one day administering criminal sentences, such as stoning women caught in adultery.
Muslims are required to submit to Sharia in Muslim societies but are excused in nations where they live as a minority under a non-Muslim government.
Canada, however, is preparing for its 1 million-strong Muslim minority to be under the authority of a Sharia system enforced by the Canadian court system, according to the Canadian Law Times.
Muslim delegates at a conference in Etobicoke, Ont., in October elected a 30-member council to establish the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice.
The institute is classified in Islamic law as a Darul-Qada, or judicial tribunal. Its bylaws are scheduled to be drafted and approved by Dec. 31.
Cases will be decided by a Muslim arbitrator, but the local secular Canadian court will be the enforcer.
Out!
Simon Crean is toast.
A quick prediction. The press will probably back Latham (ie, News.com.au and the like), however Beazley will get over the line. As I wrote yesterday, people will soon be reminded about Latham's deeply conservative attitudes on a whole range of issues and this will frighten a few of the horses.
The only thing working against Beazley is the fact that he doesn't denounce the "Great Satan" with the vitriol of Latham. Given that Beazley is an unreconstructed tax-and-spender, he will surely prevail.
With regards to the media - if Beazley is running against Howard, the majority of the media will back Howard (Fairfax will hedge, and the ABC will do what they always do - back the Greens). If Latham is the leader of the ALP, then the media will unanimously (news.com, Fairfax, ABC) back Latham over Howard.
November 27, 2003
The Murdoch Fix is in
A weary traveller, fresh from observing Buddha's tooth-shrine in Kandy, Sri Lanka, renews his interest in the Labor leadership crisis.
Simon Crean's era of no substantial policy direction, coupled with poor personal (as opposed to party) polling with the electorate is about to bring his leadership of the ALP to a close. It has become clear for some time that Crean's leadership of the ALP would never be acceptable to important sectional interests in the community such as the Murdoch press. His lack of charisma and inability to deliver on his "policy not polls" promise during the Beazley leadership challenge have been the necessary signatures on his death warrant.
A SHOWDOWN between Kim Beazley and "new generation" candidate Mark Latham for the Labor leadership is likely next week following Simon Crean's expected resignation as Opposition Leader today.
Although he was officially considering his options last night, the embattled Mr Crean is expected to resign today as negotiations are already under way for Mr Latham to take his place.
This would clear the way for a leadership ballot to take place when the 92-strong Labor caucus next meets, in Canberra on Tuesday.
Desperate Crean supporters were trying last night to ensure that "treachery will not be rewarded" and to head off potential challenges from former Opposition leader Mr Beazley and Labor foreign affairs spokesman Kevin Rudd.
But senior Labor Right MPs have told The Australian they believe Mr Latham would alienate "middle Australia", particularly women, if he were elected to take on John Howard.
After being stunned by a withdrawal of key support from Labor's Left, Mr Crean's leadership was in disarray yesterday as he was forced to consider digging in desperately to fend off all challengers or resigning in favour of Mr Latham, his Treasury spokesman and loyal supporter.
Labor's crisis began after factional powerbrokers John Faulkner and Martin Ferguson made a surprise visit to Mr Crean's Canberra home on Wednesday night.
The Labor leadership contest will be between two substantial directions in social democratic policy. Those directions are in many ways polar opposite paths. They are:
-A dry, low tax economic policy and neutralist foreign policy under Latham
-A wet, high tax economic policy and firmly western foreign policy under Beazley
The remnants of the Crean bloc will support Latham. However, as the ALP Left now makes up close to 45% of caucus (they are much more powerful than at any time in the last 20 years), they will face a large dilemma. Do they support a liberal economic model as the price for getting a Luvvie foreign policy under Latham? Or do they support a firmly pro-US foreign policy as the price for getting a substantial welfare state and public sector (with lots of jobs for ALP Lefters implied within) under Beazley.
The Left are the important swing vote here as the Right will be fairly evenly divided between Latham and Beazley. The Left will favour Beazley on economics. The Left will favour Latham on foreign affairs. The Left will also remember that there is no difference between Beazley and Latham on issues dear to the heart of luvvies such as refugees. However, Latham has held some deeply conservative, and even Pearsonite, views on indigenous policy and law and order. Will these views and newspaper op-eds written by Latham be aired again to influence the vote? Will the Latham proposal to make welfare recipients pay back their entitlements (which was in "Civilising Global Capital") be a reminder to the Left just what they may be dealing with here?
It is probably fair to say that, as unpalatable as Beazley's national security mentality is to a luvvy, he could easily be rolled by a caucus now used to airing their views on such issues without fear (whether this would still apply close to an election is another thing entirely). Thus he will try to dry out the refugee policy, and he will be rolled. The Left will get what they want on spending, as well as plenty of apologies and statutory commissions under Beazley. They might even roll the Bomber on security issues.
Latham will be much more of a problem, because he comprehensively assaults the prejudices of the Left from virtually every direction. Latham substantially agrees with people like Tony Abbott on the causes of poverty, and is in many ways very socially conservative. He is also the driest economic pointy-head to rise to a position of prominence in the ALP since Peter Walsh (not that this is a bad thing). He will take positions on the usual sops to the Left (Aborigines, crime, welfare), that the Right uses to buy breathing space, that will amount to a declaration of war.
Thus a greater proportion of the Left shall support Beazley than Latham, on account that the benefits to luvvydom will exceed the costs. I believe that Beazley will defeat Latham in a leadership contest, however this blogger will happily eat his words several thousand miles from home should he be proven wrong.
