I am sure there are lessons to be learned from the Northern Territory election result - which may even yet see the Labor government tipped out of office – but I wouldn't suggest I know what all those lessons are. Still, if the reported comments in this story are anything to go by, even long-time federal Labor NT MP Warren Snowden isn't sure yet what the lessons are yet either.

The result wasn't predicted by electoral pundits. This means it will now be called a 'shock' result, although one could just as easily say it just means the pundits weren't paying enough attention. Having said that, there are factors about NT politics which do make elections harder to predict. But that doesn't mean there aren't lessons to be taken out of the result – just that we shouldn't uncritically assume that the lessons are whatever they are allegedly determined to be by the same pundits who were so wrong in their pre-election predictions.

While there is unlikely to be anything in the NT result to give Kevin Rudd any direct concern (as opposed to some state Labor governments), the fact the Territory has some major differences from other jurisdictions is no reason to ignore the lessons it might provide.

Maybe one possible lesson from this result is that voters hate early elections being called for no good reason, (other than the incumbent government seeing a short-term political opportunity). If this was a factor in the NT result, then Alan Carpenter and the Labor government in WA might have a shock coming up soon too.  And if Anna Bligh was thinking of calling an early election in Queensland based on little more than beating up on Lawrence Springborg for allegedly not having any backbone, she might also want to think twice.

One could also theorise – without any solid evidence unless some proper post-election surveying was done – that having a Labor government federally might now be working against Labor governments at state and territory level, as voters seek to provide some balance against total Labor domination.

It is doubly dangerous/dubious trying to analyse the reason/s behind election results in places one doesn't live in – even more so in the case of somewhere like the Northern Territory, where a number of local factors make it quite distinct from anywhere else in Australia. These include the very small electorates (which make personal factors around the candidates more significant), the significant differences between Darwin and the rest of the Territory, the majority Aboriginal population outside the major cities, and even the small number of candidates in most seats (including the very rare occurrence this time around of two electorates where the sitting Labor members were returned unopposed, which some wrongly saw as a sign of how weak the CLP Opposition was).

As an outsider but occasional visitor, I would also suggest that living in the Territory feels much more like you are 'somewhere else' than any other part of Australia. Even in Darwin, you can't get a newspaper from elsewhere in the country until after midday, and it is commonly stated that the local paper is far more likely to run stories about crocodile sightings and the like than anything remotely political.

In my experience, Australian blog Club Troppo gives more regular locally based insights into NT politics than anywhere else on the web, including the mainstream media. (although before anyone suggests I am just engaging in blogosphere triumphalism, I should note they didn't do any better than the professional pundits in predicting the loss of seats that occurred.)

My impression of the CLP has always been very much coloured by their past approach of regularly adopting policies campaign messages which seemed to me to be nothing less than blatant appeals to racist bigotry. But I didn't see the same thing this time (at least from afar), even when the favourable High Court ruling came down in the middle of the campaign recognising Aboriginal rights to the intertidal zone along much of the Territory coast.

The tendency with election results is for people to interpret them in a way which suits their preferred worldview. I could do the same here, but I would be doing so on the basis of pure supposition and minimal evidence. Of course virtually every other interpretation you read in the newspapers (or on blogs) about the result will be doing the same.

I could be truly heroic and suggest NT voters were expressing their disgust at the failure of the Labor government to direct adequate funding to Indigenous communities, and (from what I could see from a distance) the CLP Opposition seemed to take Indigenous issues more seriously this time around than the government did.

A less uplifting interpretation is that NT voters were so outraged by the High Court ruling during the campaign recognising the land rights of Aboriginal people to coastal intertidal zones – and thus threatening the 'right' of people to fish where they liked – that they protested by voting against the government of the day. However, from what I could see, the CLP didn't respond like it might have in days gone by with a frenzy of racially loaded and inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed (again with the qualifier that it was very much from afar), the response to the High Court finding from the CLP Leader Terry Mills looked less tilted to potential anti-Aboriginal prejudice than the Labor Leader's statements.

Another potentially positive take on the result is that voters are not as driven by self-interest as is often assumed. Jacques Chester on Club Troppo lamented last week (wrongly as it turned out) that CLP Leader Terry Mills' policy of cutting back on some of the public sector in the NT – whilst in Chester's view a very sound approach – would only serve to lose the CLP votes in the crucial Darwin seats where the same public servants lived. Chester suggested that Terry Mills' "fatal flaw" is that "he is too honest for politics". It would be a nice thing indeed if a lesson from this election is that honesty in politics might actually be something which reaps electoral rewards, although again one shouldn't make wild assertions without some solid research or polling to back it up.

I have been a dyed in the wool Obama fan from the time I read his books last year. It isn't overly edifying watching him do the inevitable and unavoidable 'tracking to the centre' since he secured the Democrat nomination, but understandably he wants to win, and I think the rest of the world also needs him to win in a very big way. In any case, the big reason why he appeals to me is not his policy positions on any specific issues, but his stated views on how to improve the processes of politics. His exposure to diverse experiences and attitudes can't hurt either.

In contrast, I don't think I've ever had a positive thought about Paris Hilton until today. But if the US had preferential voting, then after seeing her response on YouTube Funnyordie.com to the puerile 'attack' advert of John McCain, one could be fleetingly tempted to suggest a Paris 1, Barack 2 vote.

By way of nothing very relevant, I discovered just yesterday that I share the same birthday as the Big O. I guess that shouldn't make me think he's even more worthy of support, especially as I don't believe all that zodiac/star sign stuff. But given how much the Presidency of the USA impacts on the rest of the world, I still think it's fair enough to lobby any readers who have the privilege/responsibility of being able to vote in the upcoming US Presidential ballot.  So anyone reading this who does get to vote in that election  - I don't really care if he's a celebrity or not, just for him!

The Federal Opposition's Indigenous Affairs shadow minister, Tony Abbott, is spending three weeks in a community on Cape York in far-north Queensland. He highlights one of the real difficulties for parliamentarians in meaningfully engaging with Indigenous (and to some extent also other) communities. 

The problem with politicians getting to know the issues in indigenous townships is that we tend to suffer from what Aboriginal people call the 'seagull syndrome' — we fly in, scratch around and fly out," said Mr Abbott.

When I was in the role of Senator, representing a state as huge as Queensland – and also the only one from my state outside of the major parties and keen to be re-elected – it was hard to ignore the compelling reality that spending big chunks of time in Aboriginal communities with small populations was unlikely to help me achieve the goal of re-election; even though a key reason why I had that goal was so I could continue to focus on promoting Indigenous issues.

I visited a number of Aboriginal communities in Cape York and FNQ in recent years (see here and here for a couple of mentions on this blog), as well as places such as Palm Island. The problem Tony Abbott mentions is very real. You are always conscious you are dropping in very briefly, and in the back of your head is the thought that everyone you meet with has the thought in the back of their head that you are just passing through and will never be back.  This will inevitably be true in some cases, but the unfortunate by-product of knowing that is how people might react is to make you averse to going a place at all if it's only going to be a short and possibly non-repeated visit.

While my perspective is no doubt affected by the peculiarities of being a minor party Senator rather than a local member, the 'seagull' phenomena which Tony Abbott mentions is a real trap for Ministers and shadow ministers (and thus also for minor party politicians who try to cover a wide range of portfolios). I completely sympathise with his view. It was the main reason why I went to fewer Aboriginal communities than I should have. I felt I shouldn't go to a place unless I thought there was a fair chance I could come back again to show I was genuine following up their concerns and not just being the 'seagull' that Abbott describes.

Of course, even though I did manage to revisit some places a number of times, I did still end up only paying single visits to some key places, such as the Torres Strait - a particular regret I didn't spend longer or revisit there - but also places like Mapoon, Woorabinda, Hopevale and Doomadgee.

Having said all that, while politicians sometimes go to such places for media or marketing opportunities, they would very rarely do so with the aim of winning significant numbers of votes specifically in the places they visit. Given the results at the last election, it certainly didn't get me any extra votes in the communities that I had paid multiple visits to, but if you go to places with the aim of improving your understanding and looking for ways you can be of better help, then you shouldn't be seeking (or expecting) any immediate bounce in votes.

No doubt some will be cynical that Tony Abbott got some media along to cover his extended stint in the Cape, but that's part of his job. The key thing is if he's genuinely sticking around the place for a few weeks, then he will not only get a fuller understanding of some of the underlying issues, but he will also leave a much more solid feeling amongst local people that has has some genuine interest and commitment on Indigenous issues. That certainly can't be a bad thing.

This report from Reporters Without Borders details the decision by European satellite company, Eutelsat, to stop broadcasts into Asia of an independent US based Chinese-language broadcaster NTDTV, using the dubious claim that the halt is due to a 'technical problem'. 
NTDTV includes stories on human rights issues amongst its coverage, and not surprisingly the Chinese government has condemned its material. Equally unsurprisingly, they have applied commercial and political pressure to satellite companies not to broadcast their material.

This isn't unprecedented of course. The decision by Google to self-censor its Chinese site was cause of major controversy. There have been examples of Australian Universities receiving pressure from Chinese government officials about the holding of forums on topics such as Tibet or Falun Gong.

Rigorous censorship is no surprise (except perhaps to the IOC) coming from a totalitarian regime. What is a bigger concern is when organisations, companies and governments from other countries – especially countries that allegedly support democratic principles – exacerbate it by censoring ourselves.

As to what is happening at the moment in China itself, latest reports suggest the Chinese government has slightly relaxed the blocks on the ability of foreign journalists in Beijing to access some information on the internet.

According to ABC reporter Karen Barlow "We can access websites such as Amnesty and BBC China which were blocked before.  However we have also tested outside this building and I would say that those websites, anyone outside the venue would have great trouble getting through still today and (as for) Falun Gong, you can not get onto any of those websites anywhere in China."

The Open Net Initiative is a collobartion between four academic institutions, which investigate and analyses Internet filtering and surveillance practices around the world. According to their latest report: 

a marquee list of websites that have been tantamount to being permanently blocked by the Chinese government in recent years, including the BBC News in Chinese, the Hong-Kong based Apple Daily newspaper, Amnesty International, Radio Free Asia and even Chinese Wikipedia (http://zh.wikipedia.org), were not only accessible at Olympics venues but also for ordinary Internet subscribers in Beijing.

The abrupt about-face came only a day after the IOC confirmed filtering would be implemented at the MPC, and was announced as a joint decision of the IOC Coordination Commission and BOCOG. According to an Olympics organizer, "Internet use will be just like any Olympics." In at least one key respect, however, these Games mark a departure, as sites relating to the Falungong spiritual movement (also known as an "evil, fake religion" in official China) and certain human rights NGOs (http://www.hrichina.org) remain inaccessible.

China's system of tcp resets triggered by sensitive keywords also appears to be firmly in place:
- a Chinese search using the terms "Tibetan independence" on Chinese Wikipedia resulted in a tcp reset, while the same search using a proxy yielded 26 pages of results.
-a search on YouTube for "tank man," "Tiananmen," and "1989" resulted in a tcp reset.

Another open question is whether China's Internet filtering practices will be transformed in the rest of the country, and for how long. For most Chinese citizens the situation appears to be more of the same–the usual strict supervision goes into hyperdrive as sensitive political events unfold. As international media focused their attention on websites hosted overseas, China has already tightened control over domestic cyberspace, such as online discussions on online forums and chat rooms. In July, more than 50 Chinese web portals have issued a joint declaration calling for Chinese Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to jointly welcome the Beijing Olympics Games by embracing a new online ethics and enhancing self-regulation of "harmful" information. In addition, operators are encouraged to shut off third-party SMS subscription and creation services for wireless value-added service providers, as well as BBS services. All major BBSs in China have been placed under supervision.

This is another indication of just how paranoid the Chinese government is about Falun Gong. I am at a loss to really understand why, but given that the site of the international Chinese NGO, Human Rights in China, also remains blocked, it could be to do with a higher sensitivity to Chinese people criticising the Chinese communist party, compared to organisations such as Amnesty International, which can be portrayed as a 'western' group – even though the human rights principles Amnesty campaigns on are internationally recognised as universal principles, rather than ones unique to any particular society or ideology

The revulsion felt toward child sex offenders is understandable. Indeed, it would be a worrying thing if we didn't feel such revulsion. But the current vigilante fervour towards a now notorious convicted paedophile, Dennis Ferguson, who is lawfully living in south-east Queensland is ill-directed.

This guy was chased out of the small town of Miles, north and a bit inland from Brisbane. He was moved to an area just south of Brisbane, where reportedly a Christian group is being funded to help watch over him. The locals there are also trying to chase him out. Personally, I would rather know exactly where he is and that he is being watched by an organisation funded to do so, rather than have the risk of him being driven underground. There have been known sex offenders living in my neighbourhood in the past, and while everyone would rather such people didn't exist, I didn't feel any less safer for my daughter as a result.

The unfortunate facts are that children are much more likely to be abused by a relative or an authority figure they are in the care of. That doesn't mean we can blithely ignore 'stranger danger', but it means the bigger risks are much closer to home.

Indeed, according to a report just yesterday in The Courier-Mail, "almost 6500 child-sex charges were laid across the state between July 2005 and June 2007", with Brisbane alone having with 560 people charged with indecently treating a child under 16.  That means there's a very good chance that pretty much every suburb in Brisbane has a child sex offender lurking within it as we speak. I'm not in a position to judge how dangerous or otherwise Dennis Ferguson is, but at least we currently know where he is and can be reasonably confident he is being closely watched. I doubt we can say the same about the many other perpetrators of child sex offences living amongst us at the moment.

On a related issue, there are some interesting legal issues surrounding why Mr Ferguson is out in the community at the moment which are also being somewhat obscured by the current hysteria. Charterblog - the excellent law blog which examines the operation of the Victorian Chater of Human Rights – examines some of those issues and looks at the Judge's reasons to halt Ferguson's trial. Again, it is understandable that people are concerned at the possibility that Mr Ferguson may not be tried for crimes he's accused of, but the reasons why that has happened should not should not be ignored, and nor should the fact that he has already been held in jail on remand for over two and a half years for offences he has not been convicted of

I'm giving my final Valedictory speech in the Senate this coming Wednesday evening, around 6pm. News Radio should be broadcasting the Senate at that time, or you can listen in online through www.aph.gov.au.  There's another story in today's SMH exploring where the Democrats went wrong. I might write some stuff here on that topic later, but There's no shortage of material when it comes to the party's achievements so I'd rather the final week of the Democrats' 30+ years in the Senate focused on that rather than why it has ended.

Bushs' former press secretary refuses more truths about the Iraq invasion disgrace: there was a "failure to be open and forthright on Iraq and rushing to war with inadequate planning and preparation for its aftermath.” Another sign of just how massively John Howard failed Australia by signing our nation up to start this war.

After some of the public attacks on refugees from Africa which occurred in the lead up to last years election for allegedly 'not integrating', with the worst inferences being targeted at young males, it was good to see a story in today's Australian newspaper highlighting the positive expectations for African refugees in the future of Australian soccer.

Four African refugees - from Sudan, Congo, Ethiopia and Liberia – are part of the Joeys, which is Australia's under-17 side. The story also featured another black African player who migrated here from Zimbabwe, plus another from PNG.  Football Federation Australia is trying to win the rights to stage the 2018 World Cup, and the chair of FFA is highlighting that players like these will be the future faces in our Socceroos team, alongside those from European countries that have traditionally made up the bulk of the team.

By coincidence, the same day this story appeared I attended a social soccer match in suburban Brisbane between teams made up of people from Liberia and Botswana – some migrants, some refugees, some students, some of them Australian citizens and most of the rest to become so in the future. These young Australians do a lot more than play soccer of course, but that is just one area where their skills and energies will be able to help improve our nation's future.

RELATED: Click on this story to read of another African refugee who is representing Australia at this year's paralympics.

Over two years ago, I wrote a piece on this blog about hearing loss. I've raised it once or twice in speeches and in the Senate since then, but it's still an issue which doesn't have a particularly high public profile, despite the very large numbers of being affected – estimated to currently be about one in six Australians, rising to about one in four by 2050.

My blog post led – no doubt through the beauty of Google - to me being interviewed for Radio National's Life Matters program on the topic as part of a segment on hearing loss through exposure to loud noise, music, headphones use and the like. That segment was broadcast today.  You can listen to the interview or download it through this link.