Matters related thereto
Roy Morgan has spared the government a new set of poll results this week, presumably holding over last weekend’s face-to-face results for a combined two weeks’ result to be published next week. So here’s some stuff that has accumulated during my recent period of indolence:
• The federal parliament’s Joint Standing Committee of Electoral Matters brought down its report into the 2010 federal election a fortnight ago. One noteworthy innovation is a less pompous report title, “The 2010 Federal Election: Report on the conduct of the election and related matters” replacing the traditional formulation of “Report on the conduct of the (insert year) federal election and matters related thereto”. Antony Green summarises its recommendations here; now that my holidays are over I’ll shortly get around to reviewing it and will have more to say after I’ve fully absorbed it.
• One of the majority report’s recommendations was that the federal government follow the example of New South Wales and Victoria in allowing government records such as drivers licences, vehicle registration and Year 12 school enrolments to be used to automatically update the electoral roll. However, this is opposed in the dissenting JSCEM report from the committee’s Coalition members, for reasons I do not find persuasive. Antony Green has reviewed the impact of such measures in New South Wales since their introduction last year, observing that only 12 per cent of the 70,000 people whose enrolments have been added or updated have taken the trouble to enrol the old-fashioned way for the federal electoral roll. His conclusion: “On the evidence so far, by the time of the next commonwealth election in the second half of 2013, there could be as many as 200,000 voters enrolled for NSW elections and eligible to vote at commonwealth elections who will be missing from the commonwealth roll or be enrolled at the wrong address.”
• Draft electoral redistribution boundaries have recently been published for both our nation’s territory parliaments. Antony Green surveys the results for the Northern Territory here and the Australian Capital Territory here. An ACT redistribution would normally be of minor interest, as the territory is only divided into three electorates for purposes of a regionally based system of proportional representation, but Antony asserts that in this case the changes are radical enough to be of substantial interest, and in particular to put at risk the fourth seat the Greens won at the 2008 election. For the Northern Territory, Antony has calculated new margins for each of the 25 seats, with the caveat that the enormous sitting member factors which result from pocket-sized electorates of 4000 to 5000 voters make party-based margins less reliable than usual.
• There has been much talk lately about the possibility of an incoming Coalition government calling an early double dissolution election should it meet Senate resistance from its efforts to abolish a carbon tax. Tony Abbott’s argument to those concerned about the resulting uncertainty and expense is that opposing its repeal in the Senate would be politically suicidal for a defeated Labor Party, a case pursued by Queensland legal academic James Allan in The Australian.
There was a fair bit of material I had been compiling on Western Australian matters to coincide with a looming quarterly state Newspoll, but I was caught on the hop when it was published a month earlier than I’d anticipated.
Page 1 of 2 | Next page
Categories: Federal Politics 2010-, Western Australian Politics
Victoria: there is a level of shrillness that is disproportionate if they have nothing to hide. It’s like people knowingly driving unregistered cars without a driver’s licence complaining about police having “better things to do” than random registration and licence checks.
Besides – and strange as it might sound – it is actually possible for the government to walk and chew gum at the same time. Why not have an inquiry bubbling along in the background? If there is nothing to find, it will find nothing. Simple.
It won’t be taking up valuable news space (unless the media itself chooses to report it) and they can still shout out their usual anti-government headlines to their heart’s content.
So why so shrill if it won’t find anything?
by Danny Lewis on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:49 am
It’s time
We have Andrew Bolt
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:50 am
Barrie Cassidy was taking a balanced view, but Stutchberry shouted him (and Mischa) down throughout.
The piece that annoyed me was the long playing, early on, of Abbott saying he wouldn’t have our excellent media muzzled in any way as they must always bring a bad government to account.
I shouted at the TV “They never bluddy well bring you to account, tho!”
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:50 am
I have criticised the efforts of corporate regulator ASIC on many occasions. Here is another example of the “Watch-Puppy” as Michael Pascoe has christened them:
http://www.theage.com.au/business/how-fraudsters-can-easily-bring-the-watchdog-to-heel-20110723-1hu5a.html
So once again in this country corporate criminals don’t even get charged with a criminal offense – just a wrist-slap suspension – while we send drug addicts to jail for five years for holding up a KFC. There is political capital to be made for the first government that reforms this area properly.
by Socrates on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:53 am
Danny Lewis
The msm have been shrill against this govt for yonks. A media enquiry is just another thing for them to rant about.
And of course, the msm dont want a spotlight shined on them
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:53 am
Joe 2
Me too
Shockingly biased. Insiders as a concept has to go.
No place on the ABC for the private sector media to be stars. Today’s effort has highlighted this more than any other time (or made it obvious). It is also boring today.
by daretotread on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:53 am
it depends how you view MTR.
Melbourne does have a widely-read tabloid columnist who for years has been using his dodgy calculator to claim that Africans commit more violent crimes than anyone else in Melbourne.
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:54 am
Stutchbury desperate to steer the conversation well away from any criticism of abbott’s hypocrisy.
by dave on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:54 am
Confessions, my oh turns it on and I politely ask if we can turn it off for my blood pressure.
by joe2 on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:54 am
victoria@1808
Shes got that many – wouldn’t think should would be able to keep track of all of it.
But good if money is her *master* rather than she enjoying it. Let it consume her.
by dave on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:57 am
dave
Could you explain that from Stutchberry, please about Abbott? I turned off in annoyance.
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:58 am
I must say, the more the media bang on about how we don’t need an inquiry – the more they insist every is ripper, chipper and Bristol fashion – the more I’m convinced they are lying through their teeth.
by Danny Lewis on Jul 24, 2011 at 9:58 am
Did Cassidy really ask about the Norway attacks in relation to video game ratings?
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:01 am
Mr Stutchbury has demeaned himself this morning and done so quite thoroughly and comptently.
He has constantly interrupted and talked over his fellow panellists. (What is it about right wingers that they feel the need to shout over others. Are they not secure in their dogmas?)
He has constantly tried to move each and every issue into an attack on Ms Gillard, the Labor Party and the Greens.
He sneers.
He has used dishonest arguments in relation to moral equivalents, etc, etc, etc.
Quite a disgraceful unprofessional display and inconsistent with the code of conduct of his newspaper, I would have thought.
by Boerwar on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:01 am
lizzie@1823
Cassidy & Schubert were talking about abbott saying one thing about CT to people who believe in AGW and something totally different to non believers.
Each time the panel touched on this aspect Stutchberry did the old *look over there – its a unicorn* trick. He did it 4 times in the matter of a couple of minutes.
by dave on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:03 am
Poor Dennis Atkins had two goes at explaining Queensland’s Electricity generation and supply system and got it badly wrong “both” times.
The first attempt was in trying to correct Stuchbury’s widely off the mark swing and miss.
Fail!
by scorpio on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:06 am
But so does much of the rest of Australia via tv and newspaper columns. It just seems strange that racist gang behaviour in Melbourne would be what would be expected from the virulent shock jocks in Sydney.
by It’s Time on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:07 am
dave
Thanks. Very typical and yet he was positively shouting that News was the only really respectable news source and Melb and Sydney were well served with variety. I was glad that Mischa picked him up and said that in many country areas people didn’t have a choice
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:08 am
lizzie @1823
If it was so annoying that you couldn’t be bothered watching and forming your own opinion, why do you then want the opinion of others?
Aren’t you being just a little inconsistent?
by bemused on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:12 am
I wrote:
It’s Time interprets:
Not quite what I wrote, is it?
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:14 am
bemused, I make a point of not gawking at the scene of a car crash but I will read about it in the local newspaper. Maybe lizzie is a bit like that.
by joe2 on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:16 am
AshGhebranious Its not the #boltreport, its the #deniersreport
1 minute ago
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:16 am
Good analogy joe
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:17 am
It has the so-called Melbourne Talk Radio – MTR, which ‘features’ Bolt, Steve Price, Mike Williams etc.
by Cuppa on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:17 am
Don’t worry about it Lizzie – you must have switched off around the time I switched my TV on.
I was making sure I didn’t miss the Business show thats on after Cassidy.
by dave on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:23 am
It was also in Victoria where that Liberal supporter (with links to Bruce Bilson) stalked a young woman as she left a community forum, simply because she had expressed views contrary to the Liberal party and disagreed with Abbott.
Clearly he felt perfectly entitled to do so, and saw nothing wrong with his threatening behaviour. Perhaps it is people like him so are easily swayed by the rhetoric of the shockjocks and tabloid blowhards like Bolt.
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:23 am
so = who
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:24 am
Broke my own long-standing rule and watched Insiders this morning.
An insipid little show.
by drake on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:25 am
Country areas such as Brisbane and Adelaide!
by It’s Time on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:28 am
joe2 @ 1833
I wish there were more like you. It is amazing how a simple incident on a freeway can cause an enormous bank up in both direction as people slow down to gawk.
But your analogy is not a good one.
by bemused on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:29 am
Victoria, I heard Jon Faine say that Julia Gillard was launching “a jihad” against the media the other day and nearly turned it off. Glad I didn’t, in this case, because sensible people rang in and texted, to tell him what a dick he had made of himself.
The fear by these of people is moving to the hysterical. They want an inquiry on the police, this that and the other, but when it comes to them, they are scared shitless.
by joe2 on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:30 am
I didn’t mean to single out lizzie but I am amazed how many turn something off and then want others to tell them all about it. Why?
by bemused on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:31 am
And yet, here you are!
by drake on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:32 am
This is how Bolt has reported on the thugs tagetting African refugees:
“The underclass” according to him are the thugs perpetrating the violence, not the victims of it. This is dangerously close to the rhetoric Alan Jones used during the Cronulla riots.
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:32 am
joe2
I have not listened to Faine this week. I dont get him. He can be so way off the mark sometimes.
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:32 am
Yep, good thing NSW voted to wipe out the Labor Party, because nobody could be as bad as that bad NSW Labor government.
Or not.
This is where groupthink gets you Australia. Use your brains before you repeat this folly nationwide.
by Fiz on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:33 am
bemusef
I will give you another example. I have heard and read the reports on the Norway killings, but I have refused to watch any vision. Why? I have chosen to filter this event because of my capacity to cope with it. The same happens for eg re Abbott. I dont get as angry if i only hear about what Abbott and his fan club say, rather than having to watch them say it.
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:37 am
Oops bemused
by victoria on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:38 am
bemused
Sorry I am so long answering, but I had a couple of things to do.
I actually watched almost all the show, but eventually thoguht there wasn’t much of interest, and Stutchbury was becoming increasingly strident, so I turned off. It appears that the “look over there” on Abbott was towards the end.
I am not normally one of the “please tell me about it as I won’t watch it” people, so I promise not to annoy you by doing it again.
Also, I get irritated by the accusations of traffic reporters that everypne’s “slowing down to have a look”. As a matter of safety, if I see flashing lights ahead, I slow down. Obvious, really. Passengers may look, but not drivers.
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:39 am
What background indeed?
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:41 am
BK,
Funny you say that because I thought that quite early in the segment.
One of Rupe’s loyal foot soldiers going strongly into battle for the boss.
by scorpio on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:43 am
drake @ 1845
Yes, it’s addictive!!! I didn’t say I was giving up, just cutting back. I will no longer try to catch up on what I miss.
by bemused on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:47 am
Anyone else notice that Dennis Atkins criticised the methodology of the poll published in the Herald-Sun? Questions asked in an order that would bias the answers? And I thought that their headline, which hinted that Julia might lose her seat, was a bit off.
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 10:52 am
If you don’t like INSIDERS…….don’t watch it……….simple as that!
You guys just want every program to feature 3 journalists, sitting around, bagging the Liberal Party and praising Julia Gillard.
Bias is in the eye of the beholder.
by evan14 on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:04 am
Absolute bunkum!
I don’t watch Insiders for the simple reason that the program is insular, shallow and the format is stale.
by confessions on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:06 am
And if you don’t like what people say here ……
by Gary on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:07 am
This is why I read PB – for insightful, hard-hitting analysis, by unbiased, intelligent posters, able to cut through the spin and deconstruct any argument into its core message.
by george on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:09 am
In SA at least one is required not to exceed 40 kph when passing a stationary emergency services vehicles with red and blue lights employed.
by BK on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:12 am
evan14
You really are incredibly prejudiced against the bludgers. You never ascribe any motivation to us except “Julia-worship”. Why not “support for Labor”, which is not blind, as you think.
I watch Insiders partly because I have no access to any cable channels, partly because I always hope for a little enlightenment (a faint hope, nowadays), and partly to catch the “interview of the day”.
by lizzie on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:13 am
george
I basically get all my news via PB.
And a lot earlier.
by BK on Jul 24, 2011 at 11:13 am