The ever-so-exclusive Exclusive Brethren has made yet another underhand attempt to influence Australian politics. This group, whose access to the PM and government ministers is way out of proportion to that of similarly sized lobby groups, has decided its pay back time in Tasmania and is targeting the Greens in general, but Senator Bob Brown in particular.
The Sydney Morning Herald (November 21) http://www.smh.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/sect-back-in-fray-with-blast-at-greens/2007/11/20/1195321782667.html
reports the religious sect has dramatically intervened in the federal election campaign with a letter sent "To the citizens of Tasmania" warning about the "anti-development and immoral policies" of the Greens leader, Bob Brown.
The letter refers readers to a number of websites, including an anonymous, US-registered blog at www.greenswatch.com. This site makes wild accusations about the Greens. It would have readers believe the Greens started the 2004 race riots on Palm Island. And, get this, the site reckons the Greens are have been plotting to infiltrate the Exclusive Brethren.
Senator Brown's response: "I think the church's members are pouring hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars into this campaign … and under the Government's new electoral laws, an individual can put in $100,000 around the country without any disclosure being made."
Not unexpectedly, the Brethren denied any input from the Liberal Party.
Wednesday 21 November 2007
The Howard Government hasn't even lost the election yet, but the Coalition is already openly planning how to dismantle any incoming Labor government
Well we all knew that the far-right would be bitter and twisted losers. This is now confirmed by the Coalition's threat to take thirteen Labor candidates to court sequentially, if these candidates are elected to the 42nd Commonwealth Parliament under a Labor government.
News.com.au yesterday:
Both the Liberal Party and the Nationals should be careful what they wish for. There are enough grey areas in Section 44 of the Australian Constitution and other related sections to catch some of its own first time candidates if they are also elected. The Nationals candidate for Page, Chris Gulaptis, is a perfect example because he is a Clarence Valley shire councillor who has been active in this role since writs were called, nominations closed and the political campaign commenced.
Nor should the Coalition rely on the High Court (because that's where all this would eventually end up if the numerous allegations were acted upon) being a tame participant in any move to subvert the known intent of the Australian electorate in such a manner. Especially as the Coalition has semaphored its motives.
One has to suspect that the Howard Government's threat is a last ditch attempt to scare voters away from Labor, rather than a genuine concern about the eligibility for election of some candidates.
During its previous terms in office the Howard Government had ample opportunity to attempt the clarification of current ambiguity surrounding candidate eligibility criteria and it did virtually nothing.
Australian Constitution and Section 44:
Australian Electoral Commission advice to candidates:
Campaign Day 38
My senses have been bombarded by a desperate Nationals ad on TV over these last few days.
Apparently The Greens and Labor are in an evil alliance to release hordes of drug addicts onto the street to kill our primary school children with dirty needles.
The Nats seem to believe that voters in the bush are simple nongs who will believe any old nonsense that is thrown at them.
What's their next ad to be - Greens and Labor in despicable plot to kidnap our working dogs?
Tuesday 20 November 2007
A timely reminder that it has always been voters who hold the whiphand on polling day
Voters have the final say ranking candidates on the ballot paper
20 November 2007
Every elector can choose the order they rank the candidates on their 2007 election ballot papers, the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) said today.
Electoral Commissioner, Ian Campbell reminded electors that it was entirely up to them to decide where their preferences go when voting in the House of Representatives election and Senate election.
"Political parties or candidates may suggest to their supporters to vote in a particular manner but electors have the final say when filling in their ballot papers," he said.
"In completing the green House of Representatives ballot paper, electors can decide for themselves how to allocate their preferences or they can choose to follow a party or candidate's how-to-vote card."
Mr Campbell said electors had a choice of voting above or below the line on the white Senate ballot paper. By marking 1 in one box above the line for a party or group, the preferences will be distributed according to the group voting ticket that the party or group has registered with the AEC.
"Any elector that wants to inspect the registered group voting tickets can now find them online at www.aec.gov.au or by calling 13 23 26. Booklets showing the group voting tickets will also be available in every polling place.
"If electors do not want to follow a ticket, they can vote below the line on the Senate ballot paper by numbering all the boxes below the line for each individual candidate in the order of their choice," Mr Campbell said.
"Polling officials are available to assist electors at all polling places on election day, Saturday 24 November. If you do make a mistake on your ballot paper just ask a polling official for another one," he said.
"At this election we also have a new online 'How to vote practice tool' at www.aec.gov.au to show electors, especially those voting for the first time, how to complete the ballot paper correctly," he said.
For more information on voting in the 2007 election, visit www.aec.gov.au or call the AEC on 13 23 26.
Has luck finally turned against Prime Minister Howard?
It was a strange day yesterday for we ordinary voters trying to read the political tea leaves.
The Sydney Morning Herald and Peter Hartcher sounded the death knell for John Howard:
But The Courier Mail readers in Brisbane were coming out in favour of the Liberal Party come Saturday:
In The West Australian most bloggers gave Howard a bit of a thumbs down:
While AdelaideNow gave equal space to both major parties on the Howard Government's $200 million advertising splurge without really raising an eyebrow:
Over at Melbourne's The Age the Federal Government advertising splurge featured, along with the risk of Turnbull losing Wentworth and a blog on the Liberal Party civil war:
Meanwhile in Tasmania the Mercury delivered uncritical space to the Howard Government's forest policy launch, but also worried about affordable housing at state level:
And the Northern Territory News gave a brief sop to comment on the political scene by doing a straightforward piece on Howard's confidence in winning government:
The ABC's 7.30 Report exposed Malcolm Turnbull's $10 million grant to a dodgy rainmaking project and his rearguard defence against almost everything:
Finally, Crikey as usual was all over the shop, therefore an interesting read and a great study of Flint's public disintegration:
Confusing isn't it?
Campaign Day 37
I hear tell that the Howard Government has splurged almost a million dollars a day for government advertising in the three months leading up to the issuing of writs for this federal election. Pity its attention was rarely on the things that matter to ordinary Australians.
Almost a million a day - what on earth were they thinking?
Government's hush up with Exclusive Brethren continues
For a mob that doesn't vote, the Exclusive Brethren certainly has a very strong interest in the political scene in Australia and isn't backward when it comes to lobbying the Prime Minister.
The Age (November 19) reports that Prime Minister JohnHoward has exchanged letters five times with the Exclusive Brethren since 2003, but after 14 months of stalling on a simple freedom-of-information request, his office will not release the correspondence until well after election day.
WHY PRIME MINISTER? WHAT IS THERE TO HIDE?
The Prime Minister's office has at long last acknowledged that it has corresponded with the religious sect with which the Prime Minister has had very close contact over many years.
PLEASE, PRIME MINISTER, TELL THE AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC WHAT THE CORRESPONDENCE AND CONTACTS INVOLVE?
Mr Howard was embarrassed in August when The Age revealed he had met Brethren world leader, Bruce Hales, and at least one sect member who is under police investigation over his role in funding pro-Liberal campaign advertisements in the 2004 election.
Greens leader Bob Brown said the Government had once again manipulated the FoI Act to hide information. Mr Brown was told by the Prime Minister's department, in response to his own FoI request in 2005, that "no records of correspondence with persons identifying as representatives of the Exclusive Brethren … were located". The response to The Age reveals that three relevant documents existed.
"I was lied to. That's clear. Straight deception," Senator Brown said. "But I'm used to it with the Government."
SENATOR BROWN, LIKE ALL OTHER AUSTRALIANS, HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS MATTER.
Read the full report from The Age at:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/pmbrethren-letters-held-until-after-poll/2007/11/18/1195321608622.html
The Age (November 19) reports that Prime Minister JohnHoward has exchanged letters five times with the Exclusive Brethren since 2003, but after 14 months of stalling on a simple freedom-of-information request, his office will not release the correspondence until well after election day.
WHY PRIME MINISTER? WHAT IS THERE TO HIDE?
The Prime Minister's office has at long last acknowledged that it has corresponded with the religious sect with which the Prime Minister has had very close contact over many years.
PLEASE, PRIME MINISTER, TELL THE AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC WHAT THE CORRESPONDENCE AND CONTACTS INVOLVE?
Mr Howard was embarrassed in August when The Age revealed he had met Brethren world leader, Bruce Hales, and at least one sect member who is under police investigation over his role in funding pro-Liberal campaign advertisements in the 2004 election.
Greens leader Bob Brown said the Government had once again manipulated the FoI Act to hide information. Mr Brown was told by the Prime Minister's department, in response to his own FoI request in 2005, that "no records of correspondence with persons identifying as representatives of the Exclusive Brethren … were located". The response to The Age reveals that three relevant documents existed.
"I was lied to. That's clear. Straight deception," Senator Brown said. "But I'm used to it with the Government."
SENATOR BROWN, LIKE ALL OTHER AUSTRALIANS, HAS THE RIGHT TO KNOW THE TRUTH ABOUT THIS MATTER.
Read the full report from The Age at:
http://www.theage.com.au/news/federal-election-2007-news/pmbrethren-letters-held-until-after-poll/2007/11/18/1195321608622.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
