The Australian reports Newspoll’s quarterly survey of Queensland state voting intention has Labor leading the Coalition 60-40 on two-party preferred, up from 59-41 in the October-December survey. The Liberals are down from 26 per cent to 22 per cent and the Nationals, who switched leaders from Jeff Seeney to Lawrence Springborg on January 21, are up weakly from 9 per cent to 10 per cent. These measures have been erratic: the Liberal vote was up 5 per cent in the previous survey, and the Nationals’ share of the Coalition vote is invariably higher at actual elections than in mid-term opinion polls. The two-party figures however have been rock solid, ranging from 59-41 to 61-39 in the four Newspoll surveys since the September 2006 election. Premier Anna Bligh’s satisfaction rating is up from 59 per cent to 64 per cent, higher than any figure achieved by Peter Beattie after January 2004. The one piece of good news for the Coalition is Lawrence Springborg’s 40 per cent approval rating, 12 per cent higher than any recorded by Seeney and even 6 per cent higher than Springborg achieved in his last poll before the 2006 election. Bligh’s 64-18 lead as preferred premier compares with 66-11 in the only Bligh-versus-Seeney poll, and 58-28 in the last Beattie-versus-Springborg poll in 2006.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Newspoll: 60-40 to Labor in Queensland
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
86 Comments
To complicate matters, there is a Queensland redistribution of electorates due this month.
A major problem for the Liberals in Queensland these days is that there are too many former Federal members using the Queensland scene as a playground. These in the recent past have included Warwick Parer, Santo Santoro, Mal Brough, and Cameron Thompson.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/former-lib-leader-dismisses-merger-talk/2008/04/03/1206851110490.html
It is grim times indeed for the Queensland conservatives. The coalition isn’t working. The Springborg Pineapple Party doesn’t look like getting off the ground. Leader of the Liberals Mark McArdle still has never fully explained his role as compliance officer for a Sunshine Coast Law firm involved in a Mortgage scheme ripping off seniors. The Liberals have been unable to progress past the four all deadlock that has stifled change and the pool of talent to pick leaders from is too poor in quality. Interference from failed Federal candidates does not help their cause.
The performance of the coalition in Parliament is lamentable with too many old Nats saying and doing silly things, the tactics in parliament have been weak for years. The Liberals are weakened further when the Steve Dickson’s of this world threaten to resign from the Liberals in the interest of democracy then backflip into a garden variety non democratic old school position on the receipt of a few phone calls.
All in all the elevation of Springborg a twice beaten Opposition Leader who spends all his spare time trying to herd the Liberals into a role dominated by the Nationals has not been very successful. The National Party really needs to cull out some of the deadwood that has been sitting around doing nothing for years at great expense and annoyance to Queensland taxpayers.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23481484-5006786,00.html
seems like the expensive springborg ad campaign has come to nothing
Time to bring in Shane Knuth as National Party leader I say, he would be a breath of fresh air with his bounty hunting philosophy. There would not be a pest left in all Queensland by the time he’s sorted the place out. We would have flying foxes, dingoes, pigs and canetoads on the backfoot within a week of his elevation to leader.
Imagine the ad campaigns he could run with wild animals being rounded up by bounty hunters with big guns and even bigger fridges.
Interesting isn’t it. A totally incompetent Labor Government and Qlders love it. They deserve all they get.
“Joh” & his corruptive regime was better for you
Barry @ 6 and greig @ 7 – As a Queenslander, and don’t hold that against me, let me just say that I recognise the problems with our Labor government here. Even so, they’re still vastly preferable to the “alternative”.
It’s clear Barry (6) would like Queenslanders to cop their lumps from a very ineffective opposition instead.
Peter. Here, here!
Opposition? What Opposition???
Yes – I would definately prefer Joh. At least he built some infrastructure in the State – this mob do nothing until we reach crisis point and then want praise for solving the problem. How anybody can say that the current mob are better than the alternative is amazing – on what basis could you make the judgement?
Policy. I like my oppositions, if they aim to put themselves forward as an alternative government, to do more than just oppose – to actually consider the problems and try and put forth solutions. Yes, the Government has problems, but what sort of alternatives are the Liberals and/or Nationals putting forward? I can’t actually remember them putting any alternatives to the public – they’re spending all their time on the merger, advertising campaigns, or leadership squabbles.
Now, in the interests of fairness, I’ve decided to go looking for what, if anything, the Opposition has been putting forward. Maybe I just haven’t been listening to them – which would be a problem in and of itself, because if they can’t get the public to listen, they’ve got buckleys of convincing voters that they’re worth putting into office. I’ll let you know if I come up with anything.
Peter all the conservative alternative policy details are laid out here, no wonder they are struggling to gain electoral support as a viable alternative.
http://www.qld.liberal.org.au/Members.aspx?MemID=56&View=Media&ID=2160
We could start with Seeney, Barry. Did they really think we’d cop that red neck as the alternative Premier?
Some of us remember the Fitzgerald Enquiry, money in brown paper bags, National party ministers jailed for corruption, the politicisation of the police force and the public service, the banning of street marches and political expression, among other things. We have no desire to go back to being the idiot nanny state.
Mostly though, we see an opposition that is incapable of putting together a coherent argument on any political issue that arises (and god knows there’s been plenty of them). We also see a coalition whose members can barely stand the sight of each other and wonder how this mob could ever govern anything when they can’t govern themselves.
Do we think they’re ready to govern the state? NUP. Clearly they have some credibility issues to sort out. You can’t expect to win because of the mistakes of the other side, Barry. The coalition needs to prove that it is ready to govern. They can’t because they’re not.
So, expect to be in opposition for a long…long….long…time.
My pesonal favourite policy of the Liberals has to be number 018, it still has Beattie as Premier, Boyle as Environment Minister and Messenger as Shadow Environment Minister. Wrong in three out of three cases. But I suppose you can’t merge or fight the merge and work out who has what job where at the same time.
http://www.qld.liberal.org.au/Data/PDF/850.pdf
Pretty similar to the current morgan phone poll 61.5 to 38.5
http://www.roymorgan.com/news/polls/2008/4282/
Actually almost identicial to their last phone poll. so no noticeable change really.
12 Barry – what branch of the Lib/Nats are you in? Joh was as corrupt as buggery. Didn’t you see the Four Corners program on him?
Only a diehard supporter can pine for the old days of corruption and want this present day rabble in.
Your time peter # 13 could be better spent on quality of life projects on yourself than trying to fruitlessly locate sound opposition policys that do not exist
Gary Bruce – I’m not. I guess people have a choice of retaining the existing incompetent government or giving the others a go. Left wingers though don’t usually look at things very logically. As for Joh being corrupt, quoting 4 Corners as your source says it all but if you want to talk about the good old days, let’s talk about Keith Wright and Bill Darcy – what fine upstanding citizens they turned out to be (and that’s only in Qld). I see another 4 expelled from the party in NSW just today. You can add that to the recent ex NSW ministers jailed plus the goings on in WA and Tas. If you want to have a debate about corruption and sexual misconduct – bring it on.
It doesn’t really worry me who is in power because I am in a position where their policies impact me very little. I am sick though of hearing people talk about incompetent governments and then rewarding them. Nothing ever improves if you keep doing that.
21 Barry – Let me get this straight. You defend Joh (wasn’t there the Fitzgerald enquiry?) and try and deflect the argument to the ALP. If you’re that contemptuous of the ALP bad eggs why do you excuse Joh? He was as guilty as sin. You finally end up saying you couldn’t careless who is in power anyway. This I find very hard to believe, given your stance on Joh and your desire to replace a reasonable government with a poor opposition.
“Left wingers though don’t usually look at things very logically.” This wouldn’t be coming from a right winger would it? Oh, and this “As for Joh being corrupt, quoting 4 Corners as your source says it all …” Please Barry, don’t pee down my back and tell me it is raining.
The old adage that ‘Oppositions don’t win elections, Governments lose them’ is way too simplistic. The reality is that Governments lose elections when Oppositions have shown themselves to be capable of taking over.
By that measure the Qld Opposition (either in its current form or in some kind of forced ‘one party’ marriage) will be in opposition forever.
There are other demographic reasons why Qld will never again elect a National Party government, but regardless of that it is not good for the future governance of this state to have a virtual one-party state – again.
greig @ 20 – I didn’t say they were going to be sound, I just said I was going to try and find them. I fully expect that I’m likely to disagree with them, however, in the interests of fairness, I feel I should give the other side a fair go.
Besides, I’ve already got enough quality of life projects going – uni assignment due next week (last 12 months, yay), study to catch up on, job applications to put in this weekend – I figure a diversion can only take up more time I don’t have
The National Party organisation remains quite strong in Queensland.
IMO the best thing they could do would be to break the Coalition and let the Liberals languish in their own ineptitude – they would have 0 seats in this term if springborg didn’t come back to the Gold Coast to save their bacon. That way, they should aim to eliminate the Liberals from Parliament then get on with the job of being Opposition.
That’s right George! Before long they could be the most experienced Opposition in the history of this great land.
Then nobody will be able to take the job off them. Opposition forever!
Nice.
The Libs are paralysed in Qld, just look at the mess over the prseident of the party, there is the Santoro candidate who won 43-40.
Then there is Mal Brough the anyone but Santoro candidate, then there is the Liberal who worked for a National Leader who is now the “Amalgamate or Perish” candidate.
We all know the result – Santo Santoro’s faction will win. Then all hell will break loose. 4 Libs will join the Nats – the other 4 will wreck everything out of spite, and Anna Bligh will win the next election in a canter.
26
george Says:
April 4th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
The National Party organisation remains quite strong in Queensland.
Only when compared to the Qldl branch of the liberal party.
The Nats are out of the SE corner and are increasingly being pushed out of regional centres. In Rockhampton for example the Nats could staff their booths.
So if you leave out the SE (where most of the population lives) and the regional centres the Nats are doing just fine, its just a pity no one lives in those areas anymore.
Ruawake – just when you thought the Libs couldn’t possibly have anymore factions – along comes the Nat assimilated Cameron Thompson and creates one!
It’s so sad its funny.
Possum
Cameron Thompson is the Borg’s secret weapon.
Except he is not secret and not much of a weapon. 
Geoge Brandis on Qld Stateline basically said “Merger over my dead body”
Truss says that there is overwhelming support for Queensland merger. Wonder if he’s managed to speak to any Queensland Liberals in the past week?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/04/04/2208585.htm
Boswell as usual is just confused.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/more-confusion-over-merger/2008/04/04/1207249426418.html
Gary Bruce asks – wasn’t there the Fitzgerald enquiry?. Yes there was but perhaps you’re too young to remember the results. I think 2 of the Government ministers went to jail for fiddling their expenses. Everybody else involved were Police officers not members of the National or Liberal parties. Joh was never convicted of anything but these urban myths of corruption continue to flourish. If the court process is not good enough for you then nothing I can say will make any difference. Perhaps though you could provide a little more evidence to back your assertion of corruption (not 4 corners, Current Affair or even Today Tonight which are probably your favourite sources of information).
If you consider the Joh administration as the worst corruption you have seen then you are obvioulsly unaware of what went on in WA, the Bryan Green saga in Tasmania, the goings on at Wooloongong, the numerous sex and drugs scandals in the ALP, even the charges against Gordon Nuttal. That’s just off the top of my head. So many over the years we tend to forget.
Anyway if that’s the sort of administration you want for Queensland – go for it but at least stick to the facts and provide a bit of evidence to back your assertions.
35 [Joh was never convicted of anything but these urban myths of corruption continue to flourish.]
Nothing like a nice right wing rewriting of history, Luke Shaw and the Friend of Joh swinging the jury is an urban too in your mind no doubt, Barry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzgerald_Inquiry
For the record,I think that this link needs to be here as it gives an insight how in the absence of a functioning parliamentary opposition, others willl step in to fulfill that role. The hounding of the Health Minister in the Courious Snail and Gold Coast Bulletin in particular over the past month or so has been a very focussed piece of substitute opposition.
http://tugboatpotemkin.blogspot.com/2008/04/news-limited-eats-one-of-its-own.html
35 Barry – there you go again Barry, denying Joh had done anything wrong. This is BS at its best. You also insist on diverting to other states. How does finding examples of corruption on the other side of the political fence excuse political corruption on your side of the fence? If both do it, it’s ok? Is that your argument. If you find it on both sides then all is ok with Joh? That recognising both sides have skeletons means the Queensland opposition is now ready for government?
Your defence of Joh just shows me Barry which side of the political fence you are indeed on. That’s your business of course but just don’t pretend not to care who is in government because I can see who you are backing. You’re as biased as the best of us.
Steve – I knew somebody would bring that up. Yes – it is an urban myth. Are you seriously suggesting that Joh was able to manipulate our courts and particularly jury selection. He must have been a very clever man because I have never heard any suggestion of anybody else being able to do it and if he was able, it puts a serious doubt on our whole system of justice in this country.
Again, maybe a few facts instead of supposition. Even the link you provided talks about allegations and that’s all they ever have been (and always will be).
Yes Gary Bruce. Until you (or anybody else) can provide evidence I will insist that Joh did not commit any crime or was corrupt. That’s the way things work in this country – innocent until proven guilty. So, as the old saying goes – put up.
Wasn’t Joh associated with Lewis the chief commissioner? What was the story in regard to bags of money? Was Four Corners ever charged with libel or some such for telling untruths about Joh? No? I wonder why.
40 Barry – Oh, you mean like Haneef?
Now Barry your defence suggests National Party member, if not avid supporter.
No I am not saying Joh was smart in any sense outside of cunning.I would never accuse him of being clever at all but when a member of the Friends of Joh group steadfastly holds out against the rest of the jury then justice is either not done or can not appear to be done.
It does not put “a serious doubt on our whole system of justice in this country” as you claim , just doubt about the authenticity of your interpretation of the historical detail of that case.
I suppose accounts from those very closely associated with Joh at the time mean nothing. They were all lying? For what purpose?
Joh’s performance at the actual Fitzgerald Inquiry when asked about the doctrine of the Separation of Powers stands as one of the most ludicrous things ever said in public in Queensland by any premier.
http://www.ozpolitics.info/guide/rules/sep/
I am equally sure that if any senior members of the Nationals Shadow cabinet in Queensland today were asked what they understood about the doctrine of the separation of Powers, the same dribble would fall out of their mouths.
Re 37:
(1) Ta for the linkage.
(2) I don’t think it’s quite so simple as the Courier Mail and the Gold Coast Bulletin stepping into the vacuum created by the lack of a parliamentary opposition:
“We resent having to ask the Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg and Surfers Paradise MP John-Paul Langbroek to fi ght for justice for Carmel, but they have taken up our fi ght and we thank them for that.”
(From Robyn Wuth’s open letter to Anna Bligh).
A case of the Queensland opposition becoming the Queensland Branch of the News Limited Party perhaps?
Last note: I’m a Melburnian – my main interest in the story was in what it showed about tabloid journalism. Still, happy if the information is useful and interesting for youse Queenslanders.
47 steve – Barry will see this as a very clever answer by Joh. Says it all really doesn’t it? No wonder Joh didn’t follow doctrine.
Oh Dear, now the Young Liberals join the brawl and have decided to undermine Springborg’s Pineapple party.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23488743-3102,00.html
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23488743-3102,00.html
Actually the other thing you all might like to take into consideration is that there was never even any allegations of corruption against Joh arising out of the Fitzgerald Inquiry. The only charge he ever faced was perjury and he was not convicted. He had a hung jury as did Brian Green in Tasmania a week or so ago. I don’t hear any allegations that he corrupted the jury selection process. The other fact that seems to be missed by a lot of people is that the Fitzgerald Inquiry was an inquiry into the Police Service not into Joh’s administration.
51 [The other fact that seems to be missed by a lot of people is that the Fitzgerald Inquiry was an inquiry into the Police Service not into Joh’s administration.]
The Police force and the Bjelke Peterson government were so dysfuntionally enmeshed that the two were intertwined. Why do you think they were asking about the doctrine of the separation of Powers when Joh fronted the Fitzgerald Inquiry? Any suggestions as to why they would do that, Barry?
Bjelke-Petersen cultivated a close relationship with the police service, often at the expense of the relevant Minister for Police.
In 1976, after attempting to initiate inquiries into police violence and reform the police force, Police Commissioner Ray Whitrod resigned, alleging interference by Bjelke-Petersen with his position.
Bjelke-Petersen had him replaced as Commissioner by the relatively junior Terry Lewis, who worked closely and directly with Bjelke-Petersen on a wide variety of matters, and who would later be revealed to be corrupt by the Fitzgerald Inquiry.
53 ruawake, Terry Lewis also jumped over 400 places in seniority because he wrote endless letters to Joh recommending himself as Police Commissioner.
Extensive Special Branch monitoring (including telephone tapping) of suspected subversives was routine, including not only Labor Party parliamentarians, but also National Party figures who had incurred Bjelke-Petersen’s displeasure.
Bjelke-Petersen used the police for his own political purposes.
Barry, are you saying the jury member was not a member of the “Friends of Joh” group?
51 Barry – “The other fact that seems to be missed by a lot of people is that the Fitzgerald Inquiry was an inquiry into the Police Service not into Joh’s administration.”
Now Barry, this is not really accurate is it? Talk about gild the lily.
“While the terms of the inquiry were initially narrow, restricted only to the specific allegations raised against specific persons named in the media over a period of just five years, Fitzgerald used his moral authority to lever the inquiry into a position of being able to inquire into any relevant matter.
This enabled him to set a new precedent for Royal Commissions in Australia generally, using innovative methods such as indemnities from prosecution for key witnesses to secure vital evidence. The inquiry was initially expected to last about six weeks; it instead spent almost two years conducting a comprehensive investigation of long-term, systemic political corruption and abuse of power in Queensland.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitzgerald_Inquiry
I seldom agree with Senator George Brandis (Liberal) but I do agree with his statement on Stateline last night, the gist of which was that the coalition might be polling a bit better in QLD, if the leader of the National Party (Mr Springborg) hadn’t spent the last three months telling everyone that they (the coalition) are hopeless and unelectable.
Interestingly, on the same program Mr Springborg said that he will not lead the coalition in its present form, at the next election.
It will be interesting to see if either of the current QLD National Party or Liberal party ‘leaders’ are still there, come the election.
58 Fargo61, I doubt that what Springborg says will make a scrap of difference either way. It is the perpetual infighting, brawling with the other party and a refusal to develop a policy position on anything that is damaging the coalition.
In parliament because of their lack of policy development they resort to asking questions based on whatever story the Courier Mail has run that morning. They are beyond hopeless and do not behave anywhere near an opposition let alone government.
Barry, two words, “historic revisionism”, mean anything to you old son?
Barry does has a point, there are probably as many crooks and theives in this and previous ALP governments in QLD as Joh had.
Would anyone care to examine the precurinary interests of current ALP members and report back?
Colliwobble
Your point is? Would you care to comment on the Liberal leader who was the principle of a law firm that lost millions?
So the Qld Nats have decided to poll all their members on whether they want to merge all the conservative forces in Queensland, that is the easy part. The tricky bit will come when they try to round up the Queensland Liberals, One Nation, Family First and whatever other conservative forces they want to meld into the new party. Just what are the Nationals going to offer the other parties to make it worth while their joining them?
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23490950-5003402,00.html
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/nats-take-merge-vote-to-members/2008/04/05/1207249538861.html
61 collingwoodlegend – I don’t necessarily accept your first assumption (without proof) but even if that is the case so what? Does that excuse Joh? I’m not saying or defending any particular party or party member whereas Barry is.
ruawake Says:
April 5th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Colliwobble
Your point is? Would you care to comment on the Liberal leader who was the principle of a law firm that lost millions?
for your liberal crook I’ll match a labor crook, lets try Gordon Nuttal.
My point is this holier than thou shit that is flung around is rubbish! to suggest that there are more crooks in the Nats than the ALP is juvenial! I think they probably are both infected at historically equal rate. Who was the last peadophile from the Nats?
What do the Nations mean by polling all their members are they going to be subject to the same scrutiny as union elections and council elections with the vote supervised by the electoral commission? Or is it going to be some dodgy we’ll set up the question, we’ll send out the ballots and we will announce who won the vote as well?
65 Lets not pursue that line Colliwobble, for a start the Nuttall case is before the courts and it is not appropriate to discuss the case. The rest is just too silly for words.
65 collingwoodlegend – “My point is this holier than thou shit that is flung around is rubbish! to suggest that there are more crooks in the Nats than the ALP is juvenial!”
Or visa versa, as Barry was trying to do. So Barry didn’t have a point afterall did he? My point exactly. In which case the need for a change of government is not based on who has the longer list of villains but who is more capable of running the state.
I hope nobody is silly enough to stand in front of a Queensland Liberal tomorrow with a microphone or a camera. They will get knocked over in the rush of Liberals to breathlessly tell us that there is good news that the Nationals are going to be rebranded but unfortunately the Liberal Party can see no benefit in the proposal and will carry on as before.
The silence of the Liberals tonight so far does not auger well for a merger to proceed.
I acknowledge that i did not make my point all that well but to suggest the Nats are not fit for govt due to Fitzgerald is childish/undergraduate stuff. The Nats are not fit for govt for a whole host of reasons, my favourite at the moment is their central council meeting to discuss new colours and a new name! That’ll make Queensland a better place!
“Would anyone care to examine the precurinary interests of current ALP members and report back?” Was this comment “childish/undergraduate stuff” given that both sides have their villains and are dealt with in the main?
“I acknowledge that i did not make my point all that well but to suggest the Nats are not fit for govt due to Fitzgerald is childish/undergraduate stuff.” I agree with you on this but I don’t recall anyone using this argument in suggesting this Qld state opposition is not fit to govern. Of course there have been many instances where governments have used the past performances of past governments to win elections. Do you see this as “childish/undergraduate stuff”?
You only replace a government if the opposition is competent and the government is seen as less competent, not the other way around.
71 [The Nats are not fit for govt for a whole host of reasons, my favourite at the moment is their central council meeting to discuss new colours and a new name! ]
Colliwobbles, at least the Nationals did discuss the issue and are allowing their members to vote on it, the Libs couldn’t even bother to arrange for that democratic basic with their members and just flicked the proposal off to the Feds for a top down decision.
If the merger goes ahead, what would occur at the federal level? Would the Queensland Conversative Party (by what ever name it goes) have its own party room? Would all the current QLD federal members join too, and if not what effect would that have? What share of the oppostion front bench would they get?
Its ironic that the Liberal Party was the champion of democracy and plebicites when it came to local govt. amalgamations.
But when it comes to conservative amalgamation ….
75 At this stage BSF the Pineapple Party is just a Queensland grab for power by the Nationals because Springborg blames Flegg for his last defeat rather than his own campaign.
At present it seems we going to have the Can Do Team at local council level led by the most senior elected Liberal in the land but who wins by denying links to the Libs, and a Liberal Party running three cornered contests against the Springborg Pineapple Party at both state and Federal Level.
All the while the Liberal Party will be split along the lines of Brough, Santoro and Thompson factional warlords.
Then we have Steve Dickson who is a Liberal who wants to join the Pineapple Party but the factions keep phoning him to say he can’t do that.
The rest of your questions have yet to be dealt with if the Pineapple Party ever gets any further than a secret vote of National supporters.
I am sure that if anybody asked Springborg who has lost the last two State elections as Opposition Leader in this state, how many elections have you lost he would most likely answer one, so convinced is he that the Liberals lost the last one.
Springborg says the Pineapple party will happen. He doesn’t say whether it will be this year, before the election, or this century but the silence of the Liberal Party is being maintained as far as I can see.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23493039-5006786,00.html
Yes, the Nationals are in raptures over the decision to form the Pineapple Party. Could someone please lend the Queensland Liberals a microphone, TV camera, fax or computer so that their reaction to the Nationals move can be recorded?
Young Libs have made their view pretty clear….
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,23488743-952,00.html
80 Yes, Indeed the Young Liberals did before the Nationals even made their decision, February in fact and they sat on it till Saturday afternoon. My point is what have the elected State Liberal representatives had to say on this matter since saturday. You could write their response on the back of a postage stamp,YL, and still have room to spare.
collingwoodlegend Says: @ 65,
[Who was the last peadophile from the Nats? }
Mate, I would strongly suggest that you don’t try and lead the discussion in that direction.
There are a number of people who would prefer you didn’t open up this under any circumstances.
What are you trying to say?
On some small ‘l’ liberal issues some Nats have a better record than many Libs: David Hicks, asylum seekers, Workchoices. Some supposed liberal Libs such as Pyne & Brandis never uttered a word about these but now post-Howard they accuse the Nats of being too conservative.
I see another lying Labor politician in Tasmania bites the dust. Is anobody keeping count throuighout Australia of disgraced Laborites. Must be quite a score by now.
Barry
Not sure of exact numbers but I believe it is running at about one tenth of liberal politicians suffering from memory loss.