As you’re all no doubt aware, the Prime Minister has just held a press conference announcing the election will be held on November 24. Didn’t hear the whole thing, but after all the justified outrage about the government’s changes to electoral laws, I am surprised to learn that the legal formalities will be conducted on a timetable that will leave the rolls open until October 22.
UPDATE: Those who have had time to think about this point out that the writs will be issued on Wednesday, so the deadline for new enrolments is 8pm that evening. The October 22 date invoked by the Prime Minister is the closing date for amendment to existing enrolments.
UPDATE 2: An AEC press release announces: “If you’re not on the electoral roll and you’re entitled to enrol, you must fill in an enrolment form immediately and return it to an AEC office by 8pm, Wednesday 17 October. If you’re already on the roll but still need to update your address details, to ensure your vote you must complete an enrolment form and return it to an AEC office by 8pm Tuesday 23 October”.
726 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 » Show All
Arbie old son, the only thing John Howard stands for is John Howard.
He’ll be remembered as the bloke who, in times of relative prosperity and by dint of sheer ego-driven stupidity, led the Liberals to the worst annhilation in Australian Federal political history.
This is gonna make the 1996 Keating shellacking look like like penny-ante stuff. Howard and half his cabinet are gonna lose their seats along with the vast majority of his back bench.
And there’ll be many a dry eye in Sydney over it all, too.
Appearing as a lawyer for a union does not make one a “union boss” any more than appearing for Martin Bryant makes one a mass murderer. The expression “union boss”, at its broadest definition, must mean one who has held a responsible position in a union.
ESJ, I’m not particulalry convinced the Liberal Party are any more representative than the ALP. Plus strict party discipline means that individual opinions etc. don’t mean much. The party ultimately is dominated by the decisions of the Cabinet, and if you look at the Liberal Cabinet it’s not too inspiring. Personally, I don’t feel I’m represented by either party.
Thommo, you still haven’t explained exactly how they ‘lie about the implications of work choices’. What exactly do you mean? Also, if they are lying why has Hockey not come out and used his own figures to disprove the union ads? Why did Hockey admit that it had become ‘the norm for [conditions] to be traded off without adequate compensation? I’m still not convinced that unions have mislead when it comes to WorkChoices. Personally, I know more people who have been disadvantaged by it than advantaged, although I admit the majority aren’t effected at all and don’t even know what it is.
“I believe it was an explicit condition of the Liberals that there be no worm for the debate – I guess it wouldn’t look good for the worm to fall whenever Howard talked about himself!!!”
How would they enforce this? Any television station, could hire a panel of people place them in another room, give them the signalling devices and a screening of the debate – you have the worm. As long as the “worm” is shown after the debate, and not throughout, I don’t see how it influences things.
I should add that this Galaxy marginal polling in Queensland was reportedly done in four electorates (from Possum’s site).
Well a couple of months ago he predicted a trend back to Howard in an op ed in the Sunday News Ltd tabloids. The VERY next day his own Galaxy poll showed a swing to Labor, and a result of 57 / 43!
Supposedly the 4 electorates are:
Bonner, Moreton, Longman and Herbert
Yes all, bear in mind Latho only got 42.9% 2PP in QLD.
Is the galaxy just a marginal poll, or is it the normal national figure, with extra goodies?
And yes, the Liberal ads were good comedy. Make no mistake, the election is everything!
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
yup
someone with expertise in industrail matters and workplace issues
Gee Thommo that was convincing… I’m gonna vote for Johnny now.
Not.
EStJ @ 610;
You complete tosser. That has to be one of the most ridiculous statements i have seen on this otherwise reasonably good blog to date.
You say they are all the same thing?? What thing exactly??
The Liberal ads specifically say “union boss.” The word “boss” has a meaning – it means a person holding some kind of authority. A lawyer appearing for a union is not a “boss” of that union, is probably not even a member of that union. They are a person who has been hired for their professional services. Is Sharan Burrow’s hairdresser a “union boss” because s/he provides a professional service?
610
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
BOO BOO BOO
3?
Yeah. Union lawyers like bloody John Kerr.
610
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Union boss
Union lawyer
Union official
It all adds up to the same thing.
….
What might that thing be? A target for character assassination? Really, the coalition will have to do better. What matters is leadership, integrity, issues, policies and vitality. But since they lack all these pre-requisites for office, the coalition will try insult, abuse and invective.
Yup and they’re gonna be running the country soon in every government in the country
I can’t wait – Bloody Beauty
yeah
i know a union offical in the public libary system
talk about a brute
what he can do with bookmarks and book covering materials
well..cover books…., read to kiddies, promote learning
the man is a monster
Thats it of course! If Sharon Burrows hairdresser ever runs for parliament we now have a label for her and can characterize her exactly!! But wait, is she an employee or does she own the hairdressing business?? No matter, she can be a “brave small business owner” or “union boss” dpending on what party she runs for.
A 10% chance of victory huh? To get that out of a 51/49, they must have polling Maranoa, Moncrieff, Groom and Fadden
BOOOOOOOO!!!
Adam at 525
Not sure if this has been answered yet (bloody long string this…) but Griffin was with the Federated Clerks Union. Hope I got in first, but somebody has to buy the Sunday night pizzas at this place…
Maybe Julia Gillard’s boyfriend does Sharan Burrows’ hair.
“Teenage love child union boss hair link shock”!
So Thommo ( at 593) the Unions ‘lie about the implications of Workchoices’ do they?
You must have a short or failing memory about the Government’s adverts.
What about conditions which were ‘protected by law’ – the TV ads the Government ran to promote SerfChoices made this specific statement in bold red letters – and that was a blatant lie, designed to fool the very people who would be worst affected – low paid workers in the hospitality and service industries – those conditions could be traded off in an AWA for nothing – all they had to do was comply with five minimum conditions. That left huge swathes of award conditions up for grabs, like penalty rates, shift loadings, redundancy pay, overtime rates etc.
That’s why the Government had to bring in the ‘fairness’ test, to stop employers ripping conditions like penalty rates from workers without fair compensation – now we have people covered by 3 types of AWA’s – pre-Serf Choices, Serf-Choices and post-Serf Choices, a bureaucratic nightmare, impossible for small business to understand ( and plenty of non-specialist lawyers struggle with this too). And what about that other ‘elephant in the corner’ – Employer Greenfields Agreements – this abomination is just imposed on workers when new businesses are being set up. The ultimate lie, because it is not an ‘agreement’ – worker can just take it or leave it, just like an AWA.
There are many other anomalies in the Serf Choices legislation – it’s dog vomit and the Rodent deserves to have his face rubbed in it.
If he loses his seat that’ll just about be the equivalent of eating his own vomit. Oh if there is a God in Heaven, consign the evil Gollum to the depths forever!!
The big question is – with the election only a month before Christmas, will those mean and nasty, un-Australian union bosses call a beer strike?
I think Curtin was once a union official. Billy Hughes and Chifley too, I expect. Gough was a lawyer, but Hawke was a union boss among bosses. What is your point , ESJ? Unions are comprised of ordinary people. You think it improper for ordinary people to organise themselves, or to seek political office? Why would you think that? Are you not really a democrat at all? What then? Jealous? Afraid?
Where’s this 51/49 thing in Qld coming from ?
Union boss/lawyer/ official & party official hack
is the same thing, it shows the Labor party is one closed circle or class. The “new class”.
and if you want to try something different, how many of these union boss/lawyer/officials actually worked in the industry they claimed to represent?
Lomandra at 534
Nix (Nick Xenophon) has policies on pokies and water. Given that we both live in SA, I hope the latter policy is we should get some to drink (after NSW and Victoria have grown cotton and rice with it). Little else at this stage given he stood up three days ago. Some might suggest he has more idea than the cleavaged ALP candidate for Booby (sorry, Boothby) Nicole Cornes. I suggest he will be SA’s answer to Brian Harradine (less the religious twaddle). That’s what the States’ house is for isn’t it?
JustAlarmed – in this case you are both right – more or less – Lindsay Tanner was Vic State Sec of FCU, too, but in 1993 FCU amalgamated with unions covering the local govt sector and became the Australian Municipal Administrative Clerical and Services Union (ASU).
ESJ, you really should try a new tune. This is only going to make a devestating loss by the Libs all that more painful for you in 6 weeks time.
It was leaked to the comments section of Possum’s blog. See comment 40:
http://possumcomitatus.wordpress.com/2007/10/14/we%e2%80%99re-off/#comments
The results will appear officially on QLD’s Courier Mail website at midnight EST.
Edward, is it your argument that conversely the Liberal Party is ultra-representative of a broad range of the public?
Are you arguing that a person is merely a reflection of their job? Ever worked with people who are, surprisingly, very different to yourself? Have different opinions on things?
Someone’s past job (and this needs to be emphasised, it’s their past job as as soon as they’re elected they become politicians) is just not relevant to what they are as a person.
Even calling an organiser, an industrial officer or a superannuation officer a “boss ” is stretching things. The only Shadow Cabinet members who have actually held executive positions (eg, state secretary) in unions are Crean, M Ferguson, Bevis, Tanner, O’Brien, Evans and Sherry (7, or 23%)
I have reorganised the table to make this clearer.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/a/australia/backgrounds.shtml
So when Howie gets his a*se kicked on the 24th does that mean he gets one months notice to vacate Kirribilli? Can’t wait to see him and Hyacinth getting kicked out on Christmas Eve. Hahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!
Nick Xenophon definitely changes the mix for the SA senate, though I agree with other commentators here that have pointed out that it doesn’t necessarily (and probably won’t) improve Greens chances.
If the Libs really crash as badly as we all expect, then some preferences will wash Nick’s way. He won’t feature far down their list, I’d imagine. With a strong primary (anywhere around 10%) he should cobble together a decent quota, if he doesn’t score one outright. Could hurt FFPs chances, though.
Andrew Bartlett in QLD is pretty gone. Not only are Dems primaries down but he can be expected to get squeezed by preferences. Larissa Waters (GRN Lead senate candidate) was realistic about her chances on Friday but wished Andrew success if she didn’t. I don’t think this is going to ever happen. The Dems can’t shore up enough flow to raise that boat. The Greens are at a higher water mark, they won’t go before him.
I notice Andrew Bartlett in a little desperation in the OZ today calling the other candidates “Extreme” and “Fundamentalist”. I would have thought this was poor form given Larissa’s well-meaning comment on Friday. He is effectively calling her “extreme”. The ALP used the same tactic in mailouts to New Farm ahead of the Brisbane Central By-election on Saturday, calling the Greens “extreme”. It appears to be gathering traction.
Of course, Andrew is most worried about Jeff Buchanan. Greens and ONP are fringe Left and Right respectively but this can’t be said of Buchanan and FFP. He knows that Fielding has fulfilled since 2004 the role of Don Chipp of old and knows too well that the stalwart Meg Lees departed chiefly due to the shift Left of the Dems. If Rudd truly wants balance in the senate a centrist party is best to make sure the government works.
Fielding has been successful in 9/30 amendments since 2004 (30%). This is more than every other amendment from all members, with no other party achieving more than 1%.
He’d be worried about this.
Wonder if Ed StJohn is any relation to the Edward StJohn (pronounced Sin-John) who represented Warringah upon a time for the Liberals in the ’60’s?
He was an odd-one.
A toff with something of a conscience. A very rare beast indeed in the Libs. Ended-up resigning from the Liberal Party over the Government’s Voyager cover-up.
He’d have to be at least 110 years-old now.
From the sound of the union bashing thing, this is a different Eddy. (A toff, to be sure, but sans conscience.)
Still, if it’s the same one, please tell us how it felt to get up Harold Holt’s nose with your maiden speech Ed.
Edward’s “argument” just amounts to saying that 100% of the Labor Party front bench comes from the Labor Party. Well, hold the presses!What a revelation!
This doesn’t alter the fact that the oft-repeated Liberal statement that “70% of the Labor Party front bench are/were union bosses” is untrue, and since anyone can do the research I have just done, presumably they know it’s untrue.
630
Edward StJohn Says:
October 14th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
Union boss/lawyer/ official & party official hack
is the same thing, it shows the Labor party is one closed circle or class. The “new classâ€.
and if you want to try something different, how many of these union boss/lawyer/officials actually worked in the industry they claimed to represent?
…..
Hack? Closed class? How would you know, ESJ? People have a right to organise themselves and to strive for political power. This is the nature of democracy. Do you want to deprive people of these rights? Or are you content just to resort to empty slogans and slurs?
Freely run civil organisations – like unions – are a foundation of democracy. You should be proud that unionists can rise to great prominence in our society – it is a measure of the health of our political liberty.
All this banging on about unions is like trying to scare the kids with tales of ghosts and wicked witches.
There’s some weird atavism going on here: unions equal communism, be very afraid.
Since when did a modern Australian union profess fealty to China (or maybe Cuba?) now that the USSR has gone the way of the dinosaurs?
Come on, this is old class warrior claptrap from the dark ages, and it amuses me that it’s the conservatives that like to live in past. Unions have moved on, and largely are professional organisations with membership from across the spectrum of Australian society.
It’s a sure sign of utter desperation to be trying to paint the Labor party as some sort of stalking horse for the unions, especially given the relative numbers of union members versus potential voters for the party.
This nonsense should be exposed for what it is.
Dont worry about the wall-to-wall thing. State ALP governments will probably start to fall once Rudd’s elected. A couple anyway.
In the meantime, there always Lord Mayor Campbell Newman
As mentioned earlier, WA Govt Donation to Telethon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Nh6zotlC0E&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fforum%2Eaustralian%2Dmedia%2Ecom%2Eau%2Findex%2Ephp%3Fshowtopic%3D601%26st%3D900
Further to Steve Fielding’s work in the Senate, we can examine votes in the senate. If we disregard procedural votes (on which both majors tend to agree) which are about 32% of votes currently and only count the times that Family First voted with one major party and against the other (that is, on votes of substance where the major parties disagreed) then Family First favoured the Opposition 175 times (30% of all votes) as opposed to the Coalition 119 times (20% of all votes).
Even more extraordinarily, Family First voted with the Greens on no fewer than 198 occasions, when both were voting in concert to oppose the Government, a significant 34% of the time. The natural antipathy between Family First and the Greens makes this revelation of more than passing interest.
Family First saw fit to oppose both major parties on 87 occasions, or 15% of the time.
This shows working balance in the senate and, as the sole senator, apparently Fielding is working his butt off! In fact, he leads the recent tally of votes he has managed to be present to hear and vote on at 75% (the next closest is champion Meg Lees on 69%, then Brian Harradine at 48% and fairly paltry at 40%, One Nation Senator, Len Harris).
This certainly shows him fulfilling his promise of looking at each proposal on merit and working with both sides of politics for outcomes.
I think this really appeals to Rudd, ever the pragmatist. It is really the best way to get legislation through without a DD..
Supposedly latest Newspoll will show ALP 56/44.
Adam at 641
Of course of the 12 (40%) Adam identifies as non-union
2 are hereditary peers
3 are former state or assistant state secretaries of the ALP
1 is a former union lawyer
2 are former staffers
Bottom Line: 87% hack factor amongst Labor shadow ministers.
Its called Labcest – where everyone comes from exactly the same background, mixes with exactly the same people and this exactly the same.
Hhahahhahahah leaks everywhere!
All these leaks are taking the fun out of it
Pages: « 1 … 11 12 [13] 14 15 » Show All