Previous OurSay
Next OurSay
Click here to see other OurSays. You have 7 votes per OurSay!
Crikey, House of Representatives, MP, Your question
in
“The People's Question”
Open
Campbell Newman
in
“The Queensland Agenda”
Closed
Andrew Demetriou, Amanda Vanstone, Charlie Pickering
in
“The Australian Republic”
Closed
Anna Bligh
in
“The Queensland Agenda - Part 1”
Responses up
Prof. Noam Chomsky, Deakin University
in
“Contours Of Global Order”
Responses up
666 ABC Canberra, UC, Canberra Refugee Support, Julie Posetti
in
“Reporting Refugees”
Responses up
John Merritt, EPA
in
“EPA Victoria”
Responses up
Robert Manne, The Quarterly Essay
in
“Bad News”
Responses up
Andrew Demetriou, Kevin Sheedy, Matthew Richardson
in
“AFL Finals Panel ”
Responses up
The Climate Agenda, Michael Bachelard, Misha Schubert, Deborah Gough
in
“The Sunday Age”
Responses up
You?, Greg Hywood, Mark Scott, Sophie Black
in
“Australian Media Leaders”
Responses up
Kelly O’Dwyer, Deb O’Neill , Larissa Waters
in
“Women in Politics”
Responses up
David Thodey
in
“Telstra CEO David Thodey”
Responses up
The Hon. Martin Dixon MP, Vic SRC
in
“Victorian Education Minister”
Responses up
Margaret Simons, Anna Krien, Tim Soutphommasane
in
“Quarterly Essay”
Responses up
Malcolm Fraser
in
“Renewing Democracy”
Responses up
Q&A
in
“Q&A - After The Budget - May 16th”
Responses up
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.
Winning Questions
303 votes Dear Mr Fraser, If we know CO2 emissions are warming the planet, if that warming could have catastrophic impacts on our planet, if we don't act quickly enough to stop these impacts, whose fault is that? Charlie (15) and Holly (10) . - charlie frances 284 votes Are 'transfer payments' and other middle class welfare - particularly those able to be received by the upper income brackets - driving a sense of welfare entitlement in Australia? Are they simply unsustainable masks over the inherent inequalities in our economic system? . - Josh Holloway 265 votes Knowing that BP have estimated that all fossil fuels will run out in 130 years and that the Australian government has been estimated to provide 32 times more funding towards the fossil fuel industry than the renewable energy and energy efficiency industries combined, why do you think the government invests in the past when they could invest in the future and what do you think is the most effective use of young Australian's time and efforts to help speed up the transition to a future Australia powered entirely by renewable energy?. - finding infinityMore about this
You can see the full list of questions asked for this OurSay here.
00:03
Question 1: AFL Carlton Blues player Nick Duigan asks Malcolm Fraser about renewable energy.
04:05
The power of OurSay
07:48
Question 2: Flinders University student Josh Holloway asks Mr. Fraser about middle-class welfare
15:18
Question 3: 15-year old Charlie Frances wants too see change before it is too late.
We would do well to proudly remember that Jessie Street and Doc Evatt were involved in the writing of the UN Declaration of Human Rights. I believe that declaration spells out the reasoning the High Court may have used. In relation to (asylum seekers). My advice comes from the recently retired High Court Judge Mary Gaudron. Even though they have tried Governments of all colours have been unable to overturn the original jurisdiction of sec 75.5 of the High Court. In a speech entitled “Remembering the Declaration of Human Rights”, former Australian High Court Judge Ms Mary G. Gaudron (Australia), President of ILO Admin Tribunal, said: “The Universal Declaration recognises there is no protection of human rights without the rule of law. Well, if Australia was tardy in implementing or giving effect to Article 7 of the Universal Declaration, it was more than ingenious in recognising the rule of law. The genius of the Australian Constitution lies in a little subsection called section 75(5). Its terms are probably meaningless to those of you non-lawyers who are present here today. It gives the High Court original jurisdiction in which any person, citizen or non citizen seeks mandamus, prohibition or an injunction against an officer of the Commonwealth”. “As a result of that tiny little subsection, ministers of the federal government, federal public servants, their agents and others acting on their behalf may be compelled to perform their Constitutional and legal duty and may be restrained from acting in excess of their constitutional or legal power”. “The section, is all our own; our own peculiar genius. Not surprisingly, governments of both sides have sought from time to time to cut down the operation of that little subsection; and equally not surprisingly, High Court has resisted their attempts every time. That little subsection is quite unique. It has no equivalent, as far as I know, in any other Constitution. Certainly it has no equivalent in the United States of America”. “Under our political system all three arms of Government exist separately yet none may have unbridled power unto itself or untrammelled power over any other. This is known as the doctrine of the separation of powers”. The separation of powers is a convention we adopted from the United States of America as part of our constitutional arrangements. I keenly want you to know it is possible , to compel the Minister and his Department of Immigration to do their duty as required by our Treaty regarding Refugees and any other treaty. In particular the taking in of those asylum seekers who spontaneously present at our borders over and above our quota as pledged. Australia is one of ten Countries who is pledged to take a defined quota of refugees over and above the number of asylum seekers who spontaneously present at our borders. John Ward
How do 'man-made climate change' advocates explain the past history/evidence of the heating & cooling of our planet, long before mankind could be held accountable?
This is awesome!
Yeah!