Learn from the mistakes of others

governments caring about people seem to be in short supply ...

Thursday, March 30, 2006
Australia federal government threatens veto of ACT civil unions bill
David Shucosky at 11:38 AM ET

[JURIST] The Australian government has threatened to overturn a proposed same-sex civil union bill [press release] in the Australian Capital Territory [government website] unless substantial changes are made. The bill, introduced by ACT Chief Minister Jon Stanhope [official profile], would be the first of its kind in Australia and would grant same-sex couples equality in wills and property [Reuters report]. It would not be valid outside the ACT or affect status under national laws.

Prime Minister John Howard and Attorney General Philip Ruddock say the bill blurs the line between marriages and civil unions and would be contrary to the Commonwealth Marriage Act [text]. Stanhope on Thursday called the government's statements "outrageous" [press release], saying:

The Federal Government has complained that that the legislation now being considered by the Legislative Assembly would create a parity with marriage. Civil Unions are not marriage and I have been at pains throughout the debate to make that point plainly. Legislating for marriage is the province of the Commonwealth, not of the States and Territories. The civil unions proposed for the ACT would, however, deliver functional and legal equality with marriage under ACT law - a fact from which I do not resile for one instant. That is the intent of the law, and that will be its effect, once it is passed.

Under Australian law, territorial legislation can be vetoed by the federal government, but that has not been done since 1997, when Canberra vetoed a Northern Territory bill on euthanasia.

The Sydney Morning Herald has local coverage. ABC Australia has more.

because hey, the people in the a.c.t. are not as important as those living in states. if this were a state, the fedgov would have to resort to financial blackmail to get the state to backdown.

the a.c.t. is a territory, so fedgov will just overwrite their law with it's own ... since our glorious elected leaders have control of both houses, this will not be too hard.

prejudiced bastards.


Saturday, April 01, 2006
AG Gonzales commits $15M to fight against urban gangs
Greg Sampson at 11:06 AM ET

[JURIST] In a speech in Los Angeles on Friday, US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales announced [speech text] that the US Department of Justice, through its anti-gang initiative, will give out $15 million in grants to six areas to help fund their fight against gang violence. The eligible areas are Los Angeles, California; Tampa, Florida; Cleveland, Ohio; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas; and a region known as the 222 Corridor in southern Pennsylvania. The grant money will be portioned out over a three year period.

AP has more.

Friday's announcement ties in with the Justice Department's broader effort to combat gang-related problems in communities throughout the US, which it announced in February [official press release]. According to the National Crime Victimization Survey [summary], gang members commit almost 6 percent [Bureau of Justice Statistics report] of the 6.6 million violent victimizations each year. Over 70 percent of states have enacted some form of legislation [National Youth Gang Center summary; database of gang-related legislation] to curb gang-related violence; the legislation generally enhances penalties for crimes such as drive-by shootings, graffiti, gang activity and forfeiture, and gang member recruitment.

and in the centre of the universe, we have a fedgov that would prefer to give money to 'fighting gang violence' rather than addressing the causes of gangs and gang violence.

*sigh*