And so it was with politics as we lunged into the final weeks of 2011 again debating asylum seeker policy, I was disgusted and couldn’t wait to see off the year in politics. Yet I was optimistic that 2012 would be different; that with some time off we would have reset the national tone and started afresh.

Unfortunately it didn’t take long into 2012 before we were again reminded of the negative and hostile politics of 2011. Not long ago Tony and team tried to score points on the anti-whaling protesters, calling for customs vessels to patrol the southern waters but when put to the test declared that they wouldn’t support any legislated notion (well not one from the Greens at any rate).

And more recently we have witnessed Tony Abbott now trying to score cheap political points on an issue he incited. It’s truly amazing that more questions haven’t been put to him about the complete rubbish he said regarding Indigenous Australians on a day he knew such comments would be offensive and hurtful.

Unfortunately, on a serious note, I strongly believe that we will see more outrage and statements from the Liberal Party and nothing of substance. We’ll be treated to the same lines about how policies will be released in time for the next federal election. We’ll be treated to rounds of media releases and press conferences that are about nothing and add nothing to the debates on the challenges facing the nation.

On the cross benches we have Andrew Wilkie out on his own in many respects. From all of the commotion about problem gambling, it seems what could’ve been Wilkie’s victory – common sense and negotiations produce tangible results – he’s created an untenable situation that has weakened his position. It will be interesting to watch how the others on the cross benches work with Wilkie as he now attempts to wield whatever power he thinks he has left, threatening to vote against the government on a no-confidence motion over the Australia Day outrage. And Wilkie is prepared to take this course of action despite the instigator of the Australia Day outrage being Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition.

But we don’t just have what looks like a return of the Noalition, we have a state election in Queensland that will prove to be an interesting affair regardless of the polls, and there are local government elections in Queensland and Victoria.

Queensland’s politics is in for a very interesting time. There can be no doubt that the internal Liberal-National Party tensions, the entrance of Katter’s Australian Party and the Labor Party having been in power for well over a decade.

It makes for an interesting year ahead in politics.

People in Australia and around the world have read of the extraordinary events that occurred in Canberra on Australia Day (26 January for international visitors).  The headlines paint a pretty scary picture.

There’s also been a great deal of commentary about it already (and you can expect to read more in the coming days or until the media find something new to obsess about). There are some that I agree with and even more that I disagree with. For starters I can’t agree with the statements of ‘violence’ or ‘riots’ because the people I know that were participating in the protest said it was peaceful. I have no reason not to trust them; they are themselves non-violent people.

I won’t go into the condemnation of condemnations but I think it is disappointing that one of the most senior politicians in the country would have the insensitivity of telling Indigenous Australians that a lot has changed since the tent embassy was first established in 1972, and that people should move on. It would also suggest that Mr Abbott is not as in touch with the issues and challenges of concern for Indigenous Australians as he’d like us to believe.

For me the most disappointing thing is some of the utter rubbish passed off as commentary. It’s not particularly surprising to read  from commentators that the protestors misunderstood Mr Abbott and overreacted, and that this somehow had put a dark cloud over the day’s celebrations. It’s a pity that these so-called commentators didn’t bother to think about the nature and context of Mr Abbott’s comments.

Unfortunately for these commentators they’ve ignored the very essence of Mr Abbott’s comments – that things have changed and people should move on.

That somehow a national apology makes up for 200+ years of dislocation, displacement and despair is ludicrous and shows Mr Abbott to be insensitive. That somehow the massive gap in health and education is a sign of how much things have changed for the better shows how dangerously out-of-touch Mr Abbott (including the commentators and mainstream media) is with the issues and concerns of Indigenous Australians.

It’s also pretty disappointing that Mr Abbott made such comments with the You Me Unity report released last week recommending that Indigenous Australia finally be recognised in the constitution, including the removal of sections that sanctify racially discriminatory laws. Though who is entirely surprised he made insensitive comments given his comments about the recommendations contained within the You Me Unity report. When commenting on the report he was quick to add that he didn’t support removing the racially discriminatory sections. He argued amazingly that somehow those sections were essential to the capacity of the government to govern; that somehow removing those sections weakens our democracy.

For someone who claims he cares for helping Indigenous Australians attain their goals and aspirations, his comments on Australia Day and those following the release of the You Me Unity recommendations, reveal the opposite. Indigenous Australians have every right to be mad as hell with the comments made by Tony Abbott. And they have every right to protest his comments and positions.

Ultimately the scenes created by the hysteria of law enforcement agencies could have been avoided if Mr Abbott had bothered to excuse himself from the event he was at and speak with the protesters. I’m sure if he had bothered to be the man of his convictions like we’re told he is, he would’ve had no problems discussing his comments with the protesters. He was certainly given a perfect opportunity to correct false impressions, speak with people about his comments, and to calm the situation; to prove himself a leader but failed.

Ultimately, Mr Abbott’s comments reveal he isn’t interested in having a national conversation about a day many in the community view as the day they were invaded.

The poor pedestrian is road kill in-waiting the way many motorists and cyclists use the roads and ignore the road rules pertaining to pedestrians.

One of the biggest problems motorists and cyclists have is with pedestrian crossings. It seems that neither of these road users is capable of giving way to pedestrians. These road users ignore traffic lights putting pedestrians’ lives at risk. There have been many times I’ve had to jump back from crossing (with a green walk sign) because a motorist or cyclist has decided to ignore the amber or red traffic lights.

However there is one thing that cyclists do, that motorists can’t (well not voluntarily) and that is to use footpaths. There are a couple of elements to the footpath menace that cyclists pose.

There are many cyclists that seem to think they own the shared footpaths.

They menace and harass pedestrians because they are impatient when there is congestion.  They zoom past pedestrians often without giving a warning bell to alert pedestrians of their presence. They ride two and three abreast and force pedestrians off footpaths since they think they don’t have to share the footpath.  And this is not just the lycra-clad or Johnny-come-lately’s either.

Then there are those that insist on using the footpath when there is a bike path/lane provided.

These cyclists weave in and out of the pedestrian traffic with nary a thought for the safety of the pedestrians. Here too, cyclists will menace and harass pedestrians because they are impatient when there is congestion. Sometimes there is outright aggression as the bike becomes more like a battering ram than a mode of transport. All of this even though there is a bike path/lane provided.

What’s particularly galling about these cyclists is that many people, including responsible cyclists, fought hard to get bike paths and lanes to make it safer for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Yet some feel entitled to endanger pedestrians because they don’t want to use the bike path or lane. And again this is not just the lycra-clad or Johnny-come-lately’s either.

Many cities and townships are doing a lot more to make malls and CBDs freer of motor vehicles and bicycles and of course more can still be done. However, there are still many more cities and townships that are yet to put in place bike paths and lanes.

One way of helping to improve pedestrian safety is to make sure that anyone buying a bicycle is given a copy of the road rules as they relate to cycling, and asked to sign a statement to the effect that they have read and understood the rules. Motorists don’t get off the hook either. More should be done to emphasise safety for pedestrians when learning to drive.

In the meantime, down with cars and bicycles; all hail pedestrians.

However, I won’t be discussing that issue in this post. This post will be different.

This Australia Day can be different.

It can be different in many ways, especially with the release of the You Me Unity report recognising First Australians in the constitution. The first most important way that this year’s Australia Day can be different is accepting the basis and premise of the report released by the You Me Unity panel. In accepting this important landmark report (though did we really need a report to tell us that we should recognise First Australians in the constitution?) we can begin to truly celebrate Australia Day as a day for everyone.

Australia Day 2012 can be different by re-starting a very important conversation across Australia about self-determination and recognition of First Australians, not just in the constitution but in the law. This is an important conversation that has regularly been side-tracked. Regularly, First Australians tell us the most important way for white Australia to help is to shut up and listen. We can do that and we can talk openly about an Australia we want that is for everyone.

I’m pretty certain that First Australians are more than happy to have such open conversations. But it begins with us listening first, talking second.

Unfortunately it didn’t take long for the nay-sayers to pop-up to commit to recognising Australia’s original inhabitants pre-invasion in the constitution, preferably the preamble, but nothing else; the ‘yeah-but-nah’ crowd as I like to call them. There seems to be a unison of calls to ignore the apparently more ‘radical’ elements of the You Me Unity panel’s recommendations [PDF]; most notably Recommendation 1, 2 and 4. These recommendations would remove Section 25 [allows for any race to be excluded from having their votes counted (from a State(s)) in federal elections if they're excluded in a State(s)]; remove Section 51 (xxvi) [it allows the Commonwealth of Australia to make laws that are racially discriminatory] and insert a new Section 116A [would deny the Commonwealth of Australia powers to make racially discriminatory laws].

Apparently it’s a problem for the ‘yeah-but-nah’ crowd to see an end to such elements enshrined in our constitution. Frankly it’s embarrassing.

Of course the yeah-but-nah crowd quote concerns about the legal situation and the possible destabilising affect on current programs. Of course they quote concerns about potential for legal claims for damages and compensation. All of which are bunk and needlessly distract the conversation.

Hence this Australia Day can be different by finally advocating for an end to the constitutionally enshrined discriminatory laws that have been imposed on First Australians.

Let us have a different Australia Day in 2012. This year lets recognise First Australians and accept the You Me Unity report.

Help support the national conversation about updating our constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and culture for the benefit of all Australians. Join You Me Unity today. Or sign up at Facebook.

Already we have the usual tit-for-tat commentary and the nauseating explanations of how the Australian government will end whaling through ‘diplomatic’ means. We have the continued justification of slow diplomacy with the excuse of the action being taken in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which itself is excruiatingly slow. Of course there has been the yearly ‘activists jump on whaling ship’ event. Indeed as I read somewhere it seems as this has become the yearly sideshow over summer.

But there are still a few things about whaling that really gets me worked up.

1. Whaling is still happening
2. Lame excuses about culture
3. Diplomacy has failed

So let’s go through them

1. Whaling is still happening

Japan is not the only country guilty of continuing to slaughter animals we know to be intelligent; and an essential part of the ocean’s ecosystem. There are others but these countries don’t blatantly and illegally enter Australian territorial waters to slaughter animals protected by our laws.

The Japanese continue to maintain that its whaling program is all in the name of science. If you visit the website you’ll discover that an institute that has been around since 1987 has only produced 12 research papers [updated: this based on reading the Institute's own website]. And the research done, it has been argued (here, here and here), could have been done without slaughtering whales.

I’m not sure what the average Japanese citizen thinks of wasting taxpayer funds on a research institute that doesn’t turn out research, though I reckon they wouldn’t be too happy about it.

Rumours also abound that this year’s whale slaughter is being funded through monies set aside for the reconstruction effort in Japan following last year’s tsunami and earthquake. I ’m pretty sure the Japanese people wouldn’t be happy about this either.

You might like to read this piece – Op-Ed: Japanese media agrees whaling no longer ‘central to daily life’ from Digital Journal, Jan 15 2012

2. Lame excuses about culture

Every time the heat about whaling gets too hot for Japan we’re treated to the usual rubbish about how whaling is inextricably linked to the cultural practices of the Japanese.  While I’ll happily dispute such claims, it also is a load of rubbish.

Around the world Indigenous and First Nations peoples are having to scale back or stop the hunting of particular animals because of their endangered or threatened statuses.  They do this because they understand the simple mathematics of species – hunt them to near extinction and they’ll end up extinct.

If the Japanese were truly interested in protecting their cultural practices they too would cut back on the slaughter so that they could continue their cultural practices well into the future.

3. Diplomacy has failed

Diplomacy on the issue of whaling has failed. Plain and simple.

For more than twenty years Australia has been urging Japan to cease its annual whale hunt in the Southern Ocean sanctuary.  In fact we’re reminded every year about all the diplomacy that is going on to resolve the senseless destruction of whales.

Yet each summer we find yet more excuses from Australian governments about how diplomacy takes time, or that they’re pursuing the matter through relevant international means. Most recently we were treated to the line about how the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will sort out the problems, as Australia formally lodged proceedings against Japan.

And for all the diplomacy we’re still no closer to ending the disgusting and completely unjustified whale slaughter.  Indeed any suggestion that the federal govement does more than writing letters between officials is met with horror; that somehow standing up against incursions into our waters is a problem for Australia.

While the Australian Government wants us to believe that they are doing something, it seems more like it is complicit in the slaughter. The refusal to send naval or customs ships to protect our waters suggests a government unwilling to stand up against the slaughter. Apparently we’re prepared to do nothing as it could ‘escalate’ problems.

We seem to have no problems ‘escalating’ matters with Indonesia each time we sink their illegal fishing boats. When we’re unprepared to sink illegal whaling boats, while sinking Indonesian vessels, the whole ‘we don’t want to escalation anything’ is proven to be garbage.

In my humble it’s time to send naval vessels to the Southern Ocean sanctuary and to begin protecting our waters against the incursions of a rogue state.