Gulaptis on the campaign trail - but wait, there's more!

The Nationals candidate in the Clarence by-election, Chris Gulaptis, has escaped the reservation again with a message that The Cops are Coming and they will be on the beat by the end of the year.

Now the entire Clarence Valley is aware that ten more police are on their way there and Casino is hoping for three additional probationary constables, but Gulaptis is promising more, more, more!

Do we want 20, 30, 35+ extra officers? Just name the figure and Chris is apparently privately promising to deliver these coppers to our door.

It is almost certain that NSW Premier O’Farrell, Deputy Premier Stoner and Police Minister Gallacher are blissfully unaware of the actual size of the blue army they are expected to march north by Christmas.

A walk down memory lane as the Clarence electorate prepares to vote on 19 November 2011

ABC Unleashed in 2007:

For instance, Chris Gulaptis, the candidate for their only marginal seat, Page, stated in public and on the record that people living in the northern rivers region should just put up with lower wages because of the scenery - and how about the serenity? I don't know, I just don't think this is the canniest vote-winning tactic in one of the poorest areas in Australia.

Leavening the blog loaf

Because it gets so serious around here during North Coast elections, I thought I might post this………………

Alright, Fine, I’ll Add a Disclaimer to My Emails.

By James Sinclair

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This email does not create an attorney-client relationship. Probably. If it does, it will have said it does. Although it could have created an attorney-client relationship without explicitly saying so, because the law is tricky like that, and the authoritative statements in this disclaimer are not as authoritative as they look. Suffice it to say, if you aren’t absolutely certain about whether or not an attorney-client relationship exists between yourself and the sender of this email, you should probably hit “reply” and ask for some clarity.
This email may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information. If it does, and you are not the intended recipient, then the sender hereby requests that you notify him of his mistake and destroy all copies in your possession. The sender also concedes that he is very, very stupid, and obviously should not be operating an electronic-mail machine without supervision.
The purpose of this disclaimer, in theory, is to protect the sender from whatever liability may result from the sender’s own failure to communicate clearly or properly send an email, even though the sender, having obtained a formal legal education, is well aware that a generic email disclaimer, even one written with that ominous language of which lawyers are so fond, is unlikely to be enforced against a party lacking a sophisticated understanding of the legal principles surrounding said disclaimer, and that in the case of a party who does understand the legal principles surrounding said disclaimer, the disclaimer merely restates what said party already knows. This disclaimer is a catch-22.
This disclaimer is not unlike the ceaseless blaring of a distant car alarm—a once-sincere warning that has evolved into an unpleasant nuisance, rendered meaningless by its own ubiquity. This disclaimer exists in a country where the demand for legal services is substantial enough to provide gainful employment for more than one million lawyers, virtually all of whom make liberal use of disclaimers purporting to protect themselves from the very litigiousness that pays their bills. You do the math.
This disclaimer is not especially concerned with intelligibility. Unlike the sender of this email, this disclaimer has no qualms about indulging in the more obnoxious trademarks of legalese, including but not limited to (i) the phrase “including but not limited to”, (ii) the use of “said” as an adjective, (iii) re-naming conventions that have little to no basis in vernacular English and, regardless, never actually recur (hereinafter referred to as “the 1980 Atlanta Falcons”), (iv) redundant, tedious, and superfluous repetition of synonymous terms, (v) ENTIRE SECTIONS OF FULLY-CAPITALIZED TEXT, PRESUMABLY INTENDED TO SAY TO THE READER, “HEY! THIS IS IMPORTANT! YOU SHOULD READ THIS PART! AND REMEMBER IT!”, AS IF NO ONE HAS EVER NOTICED THAT PHYSICALLY ENLARGING TEXT WITHOUT INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF SPACE AVAILABLE FOR SAID TEXT TO OCCUPY CREATES THE VISUAL EFFECT OF A SOLID RECTANGULAR BLOCK OF LETTERS, ROUGHLY AS CAPABLE OF IMPARTING A COHERENT THOUGHT AS A TIGHTLY-PACKED SCRABBLE® BOARD, and (vi) lowercase Roman numerals.
This disclaimer exists for precisely one reason—to make this email appear more professional. This disclaimer shall not be construed as a guarantee of actual professionalism on the part of the sender. Any actual professionalism contained herein is purely coincidental and is in no way attributable to the presence of this disclaimer. While the sender of this email likes to think the professionalism with which he approaches his work speaks for itself, this disclaimer constitutes (i) begrudging acquiescence to the industry standard, or at least a superficial imitation thereof, and (ii) begrudging acceptance of the paradoxical reality that people who exchange emails with lawyers both expect to see, and pay no attention to, legal disclaimers. If you aren’t reading this, then this disclaimer has done its job. Its sad, pointless job. THIS DISCLAIMER IS NOT INTENDED TO BE IRONIC.

Gulaptis tells political pork pies - again!

Nats candidate in the Clarence byelection, Chris duh, don’t know Gulaptis, escaped his minders again and opened his mouth without finding out the facts. He capped this off with another untruth. What survey was that again, Chris?

The Daily Examiner on 17^th November 2011:

“SIX years after the Iluka Rd speed limit between Woombah and Iluka was dropped from 100km/h to 80km/h, Nationals candidate for the Clarence by-election Chris Gulaptis wants the O'Farrell government to reverse the change.

In 2005, the then roads minister Eric Roozendahl signed off on the speed limit reduction which was partly imposed to reduce road kill of the endangered coastal emu population that live in nearby Bundjalung National Park.

Now, Mr Gulaptis said he has a 1500 signature petition signed by locals, calling for the speed limit to be raised to 100km/h.

He said the push to reinstate the 100 km/h speed limit was instigated by former member for Clarence, Steve Cansdell.

"When it happened it was a unilateral decision by the minister without any community consultation," he said.

He understood the speed limit was under review by the minister for roads.

"The road will handle the speed, there is no reason for the road not to be 100km/h."

Mr Gulaptis could not answer whether the petition was a recent one, or one launched six years ago in opposition to the speed limit reduction, as he said he hadn't seen it, despite claiming on radio yesterday that he had it. “

Pollie in a glass house lashes out

It's becoming clear that Peter Ellem will say anything to get a vote." cried a shrill Chris Gulaptis today.

A little cat let this out of the bag...

The Brushgrove community has long favoured building a small "low level" flood levee to protect their homes and hopefully avoid the need for emergency evacuation. 
Apparently every voter's friend Chris Gulaptis has been telling residents there that a levee in their area is not on any important To Do list - saying that a former Maclean Shire councillor (not of the Nationals persuasion) agrees with him.
I'm hearing that this former councillor and longtime Brushgrove resident is irate that Gulaptis is telling so blatant an untruth.
In fact the former Maclean Shire Floodplain Management Study and Plan refers to a flood levee at Brushgrove as a feasible floodplain management option for the village and that same former councillor is still raising the need for a levee with Clarence Valley Council's Floodplain Risk Management Advisory Committee. He made his latest plea for a levee in August 2011 when he told Clarence Valley Council that the Brushgrove community would help build the levee if it got approval.

Howzat!

Chris Gulaptis caught out again in another whopper by Peter Ellem's bowling this evening:
"But Mr Ellem called on Mr Gulaptis to provide the Budget details to back up his claim.
Is this $3.7 million part of the $11.73 million the former Labor Government delivered for Casino Public School?" Mr Ellem asked.
Labor had already provided $11.73 million over two and a half years for new buildings and a refurbishment, with the work to be completed by 2012
Interestingly, the 2011/12 Budget papers from the O'Farrell-Stoner Government claim the $3.7 million funding is for 'continued major building projects at Casino Public School'.
If it is indeed the same funding, Mr Gulaptis should apologise for misleading the people of the Clarence yet again over incorrect funding claims.
Casino Public School parents, teachers and students would have been forgiven for thinking their school had received a new $3.7 million grant given Mr Gulaptis' campaign material.
This appears to be the third time Chris Gulaptis has wrongly claimed credit for millions of dollars in funding the National Party did not deliver to the Clarence," Mr Ellem said.
If Mr Gulaptis is going to keep wrongly claiming credit for funding the O'Farrell-Stoner Government has nothing to do with, how will he fight for new funding and resources for our community?
Mr Gulaptis' first campaign move was to incorrectly claimed the Nationals delivered $9 million for Grafton Base Hospital when it was actually from the Commonwealth and former Labor Government."

And another lie bites the dust

The ever inventive Chris Gulaptis told the Clarence electorate tonight; "There is not, nor has there ever been such a scheme" to build a coal seam gas mine in our area.
Studiously ignoring the enormous Metgasco elephant at Casino (with the Liberal Party's Richard Shields as its external relations manager and Nationals Stuart George as its land administration officer) which falls within the Clarence electorate and the Casino to Ipswich coal seam gas pipeline the O'Farrell Government will be pushing to completion because the "NSW government has not announced any change of policy related to coal seam gas licences,..The legal rights of any exploration holders across NSW remain unchanged."

Update:

Another deliberate misstatement rears its head

"Country Labor candidate Peter Ellem said yesterday the funding was actually provided by the former Labor Government. This may have been a Labor promise, Mr Gulaptis said, but the Coalition Government delivered it."
So tired of all this fudging and fibbing that I'll just link to a North Coast Voices post which shows the money was actually to be paid out under a contract between the former NSW Labor Government and the builder doing major capital works at Casino Public School as I write.

Clarence By-election: Nationals also on the nose in the northern end of the electorate

While much of the reporting about the National Party and its candidate Chris Gulaptis has concentrated on the Clarence valley where it has to be said they're on the nose for taking the electorate for granted a couple of contributors to The Northern Star have reminded readers that it's not all plain sailing for the Nationals in the north.

Nationals 'thumb nose' at democracy

My teenage daughter saw a National Party TV ad last night that shows Mr Cansdell supporting his replacement and asked if this was the same guy who was under a police investigation.

I said yep that is him.

She said that they have some real arrogance for even a politician to have him spruiking.

Seems they are just thumbing their noses at our democracy.

I agreed and thought, yes, they seem to not care that one of their number may have broken the law.

That was OK, not a big deal, just vote us in again.

I am greatly concerned about the message this is sending to our young people. What's next?

Alex Smith, Ballina

Two, by George

How can Stuart George, councillor with Richmond Valley Council, represent the people of the Richmond Valley properly and without bias when dealing with CSG issues when he is now an employee of Metgasco?

Moreover, how can Thomas George, State Member for Lismore, do likewise with family interests associated with Metgasco?

It appears that LNG now have 10% of shares in Metgasco and LNG is a majority owned subsidiary of China National Petroleum Corporation.

Guess where the CSG drilled in our area will be going to?

Yep, export to China.

And this will be to the detriment of our World Heritage listed areas of the Border Ranges National Park and the Great Barrier Reef.

Please write to Janelle Saffin and Thomas George pointing out your opposition to the expansion of CSG.

John Heaton, Uralba

Source: Letters, The Northern Star, 17/11/11