884
Rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

the fact that it was legal up until less than a year ago is egregious

Yeah it really sucks.

There actually was a Bill before the Senate for years under the LNP government, brought by Larissa Waters of the Greens. Unfortunately the LNP almost never scheduled it any time for debate, and never scheduled it for a second reading vote. From the brief debate on it, we did get a picture of the attitudes towards the issue of the two main parties.

The LNP rejected the idea entirely. They don't think pay secrecy clauses should be outlawed at all, and spent the vast majority of their time in debate ignoring the issue entirely, instead talking about other policies of the LNP.

Labor said it's good in theory, but noted concerns with the way the Greens Bill had been drafted which would mean it may not have had the desired effect. Rather than working with the Greens on an amendment, they spent the majority of their debate time emphasising how terrible the Greens are for having those flaws in their Bill, and how it means the Greens shouldn't be taken seriously compared to Labor. It's a pretty typical approach by Labor. They have a big case of NIH Syndrome, because they want to pass a Bill of their own and take the credit for themselves, rather than work with other parties to achieve a great outcome as soon as possible.

[-] RedReaper@infosec.pub 2 points 1 year ago

In other words, the 3 parties acting as they always do😐

this post was submitted on 10 Nov 2023
884 points (100.0% liked)

196

16624 readers
2398 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS