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
Fredn
I’ve always wanted the Libs and Nats to merge under the name UAP.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 2:57 pm
I asked* my Sunday School teacher how did they do ‘a begat’ and got frowned upon big time.
*Actually I didn’t, but I wish I had.
by Boerwar on Jul 23, 2011 at 2:58 pm
If one Conservative Party is good enough for Canada it’s good enough for us…
The Libs hold more rural seats than the Nats and yet they claim that they and only they represent the Bush…excuse me while I fart in Truss’s general direction!
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:01 pm
If we’re returning to our roots, perhaps the Nationals can revert to the Country party and we can put the “u” back into Labor.
Remonds me of that story about the former Nationals leader (and deputy PM) being introduced as the leader of the Austrlaian Peasants Party while on a visit to China.
People say it was some problem in the translation, but I reckon the Chinese had his number, alright.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:04 pm
Just saying the front page of The Age appears inapprorpriate in light of the massacre.
There is a big picture of a teenafer with a huge rifle
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Well it took the electoral annihilation of the progressive conservatives for that to happen.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:05 pm
“teenager”
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:06 pm
victoria at 766,
I think we have a winner for the 2011 bad taste award.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Hear Hear
Well I picked United Australia Party because I think it sounds better than the Nationalists (pre-UAP Tory Party)…
LOL he musta loved that little doosey!
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:07 pm
briefly
So assault is now a victimless crime?
by zoomster on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:07 pm
Smithe
In fairness to The Age, the tragedy probably occurred after printing
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:09 pm
No thanks. Labor is Labor because it took inspiration from the U.S. Labor movement, not the UK Labour Party.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm
Funnily enough the Progressive Conservatives still act as a Provincial Party in Canada…Can’t keep a defeated Party down lol!
That name is almost as bad as the Liberals being called Liberals. Progressive Conservatives is an oxymoron.
Mind you the equivalent of the Labor Party in Canada is the Liberal Party so go figure lol!
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:10 pm
I think it was Tim Fisher, but I could be wrong. If it was, at least Tim had something of a sense of humour.
You wouldn’t get-away with a mistake like that if it had been Doug Anthony or (shudders) Black Jack McEwan.
Mind you, in McEwan’s day China was still the Red Peril, so he wouldn’t have visited the place anyways.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:12 pm
The ‘progressive conservatives’……..ROFL
by gough1 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Sjows:
Historically, I don’t think that’s quite correct…but still…..
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:13 pm
Oxymoron.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:15 pm
What are some of the policy platforms or priciples of a progressive conservative?
I’ll start it off with a couple of random thoughts.
1. We like sex but feel guilty about it.
2. We really love our workers but unfortunately cant pay them much..
Any more thoughts?
by gough1 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:18 pm
BTW Glen strikes me as a progressive conservative kind of guy.
by gough1 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:20 pm
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:20 pm
AMANDA SHALALLALALALLALALALLALALLALALAL
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
3. We stand for freedom of speech, just don’t use it OK?
4. Universal health care is a great idea, so take-out Health Insurance you bludgers.
5. Education is a privilege, not a right.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
The Mail Online article on the Norway tragedy perpetrated by a far right wing extremist looney contains several photos of said looney.
He bears a strong physical resemblance to Andrew Bolt.
Dutch Uncle?
by Fulvio Sammut on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:21 pm
3. Policies should be evidence based if they conform to a pre determined narrative.
by gough1 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:22 pm
No if you think about world history at the time the Liberal party was founded the name makes sense. Australia was a democracy, but the radical alternative was various forms of totalitarianism. I guess “Liberal Democratic Party” may’ve made more sense.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Jesus Christ almighty. Eighty people dead.
WTF was this guy armed with? A SAW?
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:24 pm
Renumber my 3 to 6 on the progressive conservative manifesto.
Good woork Smithy!
by gough1 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:25 pm
It is correct, still.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:26 pm
The thing that killed the party off was their introduction of a GST.
They went to an election saying that they would enact income tax cuts if elected, but forgot to mention they’d be introducing a consumption tax to pay for it.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm
M16.
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:27 pm
…..thinking more about the shoplifting…..assault had not been mentioned…..
by briefly on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:30 pm
While I can understand the merits of a trial and such…I cannot understand why the SWAT teams didn’t just shoot the mad bastard dead when they found him.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:32 pm
there are reports that more than one person involved in the massacre. The car bombing in Oslo took place 38 km awah from the Island where the young people were attending a political camp
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:33 pm
The real question is did he have help or was he acting alone??
The movie Arlington Road is a must fellow Bludgers.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:33 pm
Err… because there are merits of trials and such …?
by Fulvio Sammut on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Also the buidling that was targetted held the office of the Norwegian Prime Minister.
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:34 pm
Ah, Shows…I hate to be pedantic, but I don’t think the good old US of A had much of a labour movement when the ALP was born.
So far as I know, it formed out of the great shearer’s strikes of the 1880′s and ’90′s by the unions of the time. And those unionists were products of their own times, ie, they regarded themselves as citizens of the British Empire and ipso-facto, British.
In no way did they take their inspiration or model themselves on the Americans.
One only has to look at what happened in 1914 to see the proof of this: When war came, those same unionists and party members signed-up in droves to go off and fight what was, in essence, Britain’s war.
As you know, the US remained neutral. Had they modelled themselves on the US, surely we would have also remained neutral. After all, we did have a Labour Government at the time (Fisher, later Hughes) and they were as pro-war and patriotic as all get out.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:35 pm
And apparently the Norwegian Prime Minister was due to attend the camp to give a speech
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:37 pm
I don’t think any right wing extremist in Australia was involved in what happened in Norway. I hate these conspiracy theories and don’t know how they get started.
by Fulvio Sammut on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:40 pm
FS
what are you talking about?
by victoria on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:40 pm
Victoria
Jens Stoltenberg is a lucky man.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:41 pm
WTF? at least 80 of his citizens have just been massacred, how is he lucky?
by ShowsOn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:43 pm
Never mind, Victoria.
All I say is that it took less than two hours for certain elements in the press here to blame it on Moslem fanatics.
I put it down to right wing projection …
by Fulvio Sammut on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:44 pm
And that Glen answers your first question, the reason they did not shoot him, they needed to question him about all manner of things. As in Lee Harvey Oswald, dead men tell no tales.
by david on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:44 pm
Two attempts on his life by the sounds of things ShowsOn.
You have an attack on his office and then at a place he was due to speak. Could well point to him being a target.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm
Now shows, I have tried to be polite about our little historical disagreement and don’t deserve your response at 803.
Be nice or the claws will come-out.
by smithe on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm
True david I must concede your point is correct.
by Glen on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm
First off post a random denial. It grows from there.
I’ll add to it. Random unrelated questions.
Where was Andrew Bolt last night?
by fredn on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Its seems that the Norwegian Shooter is a wingnut Islamophobic groupie of “anti-Jihadi” blogs like Jihad Watch and Pamela Geller’s Atlas Shrugs.
from Little Green Footballs
Note: Little Green Footballs is one of the original wingnut websites that flourished after 9/11. They seem to be having some sort of wingnut hate-in betwen them and the Pam Geller/Robert Spencer nexus. Don’t try to understand it, just be happy about it.
This guy seems to be the most directly tied in Right-wing crazy killer to the international wingnut circle jerk that includes Andrew Bolt. They managed to spin Loughner’s assassination attempt; can’t see how they spin this one.
by JohD on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:47 pm
On this horrific day, I think it’s worth praising John Howard for his gun control laws in 1996.
A lot of ALP people on here bag him (myself included), but that was one policy he got 100% correct.
by spur212 on Jul 23, 2011 at 3:47 pm