Tony Abbott's election campaign funding in 2012-13

 

 

On 5 November 2010 The Sydney Morning Herald revealed:

 

THE political fund-raising arm of the federal Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, has been found to have breached electoral laws, while one of his principal donors has also failed to make required disclosures, according to documents lodged with the NSW Election Funding Authority.

After a five-month investigation, the authority found that the Warringah Club, which raises money for Mr Abbott's campaigns in his seat of Warringah, had broken the law by not disclosing the sources of its donations.

''The club failed to lodge a declaration [as required] and the matter is to be further investigated to determine whether to pursue prosecution,'' the authority's funding and disclosures director, Brian DeCelis, wrote to the NSW Greens, which raised an official complaint about the Warringah Club in May.

But Mr DeCelis also found that the club and the NSW Liberal Party, which lodged false declarations relating to the club, ''did not understand their disclosure obligations'' and therefore would not be prosecuted for knowingly making a false statement.

 

One can safely assume that Leader of the Opposition Tony Abbott, The Warringah Club and the NSW Liberal Party now understand their legal obligations.

 

So why is it that this club, whose primary aim is to raise money for Abbott’s ceaseless election campaigning, was in breach of the reporting deadlines again the following year – with the 2010-11 financial year annual return apparently outstanding until 2 February 2012 – a remarkable feat given that it would take all of ten minutes to complete this form as all donors are usually hidden within generic cash transfers by the Liberal Party into club coffers.

 

As the deadline for associated entity annual returns is listed as 20 October each year and returns are not publicly displayed until 1 February the following year, I suspect that The Warringah Club will keep its 2011-12 financial outlays and donations received behind a convenient curtain until well after this year’s federal election.

 

Although Tony Abbott’s second fundraising vehicle, the Warringah 1000 Forum, did manage to lodge its 2010-11 annual return on time, does list donors and along with its amendment to that return dated 17 April 2012, possibly gives a better flavour of which individuals/companies are favouring his chances.

 

 

·  Penalties relating to the Commonwealth disclosure scheme

UPDATE:

The 2011-12 annual financial disclosure returns from political parties, associated entities, donors and third parties who incur political expenditure became available online on 1 February 2013.

The Warringah Club has changed its name to The Sydney Small Business Club and has recorded no 2011-12 individual donations above the declarable threshold of $11,900.

While all mention of the Warringah 1000 Forum had simply disappeared from the AEC website on 1 February 2013.

Perhaps there was more to the reported funding discrepancies than first thought.

Looking for excuses and apportioning blame in the CSG war

 

This is Lindsay Partridge on the ABC’s PM program on 21 January 2013:

 

MARTIN CUDDIHY: The company's managing director is Lindsay Partridge.

He says Brickworks gas costs have recently doubled, and the company is struggling to secure long-term gas contracts because local producers prefer to export to Asia.

LINDSAY PARTRIDGE: The prices they're receiving is the price which countries, mainly in Asia, that have very limited local gas, are prepared to pay for the gas. So effectively, what we're seeing in Australia is the prices within Australia move to the price that those Asian countries are prepared to pay which at the moment is about $12 a gigajoule which is what we're paying in Perth and Brisbane, but may well go as far as $15 a gigajoule going forward.

 

On ABC NEWS online the same day he went further:

 

Brickworks' managing director, Lindsay Partridge, says Australian gas producers are getting top dollar from Asia, so they would rather export gas than supply the domestic market.

Mr Partridge says the process to approve new Coal Seam Gas operations is too slow and the Federal Government needs to intervene…..

He says protests against coal seam gas appear to have slowed the development of more wells, and limited new gas supply.

"The anti-coal seam gas lobby has stopped or delayed the timely production of gas, as well as a very complicated process where many of these wells have to go through both state and federal approval process," Mr Partridge said.

"So we have the Government saying, 'oh we don't want to get involved in the gas market', but they already are. They're part of the process which is stopping the timely supply of gas coming on line."

 

However, by 22 January The Daily Examiner had dropped any reference by Mr. Partridge to every reason he gave for the gas price rise except the one involving protestors:

 

Lindsay Partridge, managing director of manufacturing company Brickworks, made headlines on the weekend when he suggested the "anti-coal seam gas" movement was responsible for slowing development at a time when the state was tipped for a severe gas shortage.

He told the ABC that protestors had stopped or delayed "the timely production of gas" and the only solution was for the State and Federal Government's to "accelerate" new gas fields and uncomplicated the approval process.

Leaving it to a spokesperson from CSGFree Northern Rivers to mention price increases flowing from the export drive.

Are certain politicians falsifying their Twitter mentions?

 

Hat tip to @1petermartin for pointing  to this blog post The Desperation of a Liberal MP? on Storify.

 

It seems Federal Liberal Party MP and Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage, Greg Hunt, may be using automated retweets via the UK masquerading as the efforts of genuine tweeters.

 

Now that seems very similar to the political astroturfing under taken by U.S. right wingers and, a tactic thought to be much admired and emulated by fellow Liberal Corey Bernardi and his Conservative Leadership Foundation.

When contacted by The Sydney Morning Herald Mr. Hunt's office denied all knowledge of the spambots.

However, the article revealed other suspect Twitter accounts:

Tiphereth Gloria, social media expert with VML Australia, said the bot evidence presented in the Storify post appeared to be accurate and she believes it pointed to a Liberal Party campaign. The fake accounts appeared to be part of a “propaganda war” effort to “increase share of voice of anti-Labor sentiment”.

Separately, other spam bot accounts are more blatant. One suspected anti-Labor bot Twitter profile with over 88,000 tweets is @LaborDirt, which pumps out a constant stream of anti-Labor content. Anti-Gillard account @GI-Gillard has reportedly been retweeted by the same bots that retweeted Mr Hunt's tweet.

Sophisticated spammers use scripts to create hundreds or thousands of fake Twitter accounts that at first glance appear to be legitimate but are designed to promote a product or political view.

“Spammers and bots always have randomly generated user names. It's the first sign something is dodgy,” Ms Gloria said.

“Then looking at the profiles - the length of time they've been on twitter and the lack of other meaningful tweets and interactions is the clincher.”

 

One hopes that The Geek bends his forensic gaze towards other tweeting MPs, because it’s doubtful that Mr.Hunt's account was the only one with under the radar spambots attached.

Tony Abbott cries "Censorship!" as he starts the final leg of his race for The Lodge

 

The Australian on 23 January 2013 reported:

 

FEDERAL Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says Prime Minister Julia Gillard faces an election-year free speech battle if she presses ahead with planned anti-discrimination law reform.

 

What Abbott appears to be objecting to can be found in this section of the draft Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Bill 2012:

 

1 Division 3—Racial vilification

 

2 51 Racial vilification is unlawful

 

3 When racial vilification is unlawful

4 (1) It is unlawful for a person (the first person) to engage in racial

5 vilification.

6 (2) Conduct of a person is racial vilification if:

7 (a) the conduct is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to

8 offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a

9 group of people; and

10 (b) the first person engages in the conduct:

11 (i) because the other person, or one or more members of

12 the group, is of a particular race, or because the first

13 person assumes that to be the case; or

14 (ii) because the other person, or one or more members of

15 the group, has an associate who is of a particular race, or

16 because the first person assumes that to be the case; and

17 (c) the conduct is engaged in otherwise than in private.

18 (3) For the purpose of subsection (2), conduct is engaged in otherwise

19 than in private if:

20 (a) it causes words, sounds, images or writing to be

21 communicated to the public; or

22 (b) it is engaged in:

23 (i) in a public place; or

24 (ii) in the sight or hearing of people who are in a public

25 place.

26 This subsection does not limit the circumstances that may

27 constitute engaging in conduct otherwise than in private.

28 Exception

29 (4) Subsection (1) does not make it unlawful for a person to say or do

30 something, reasonably and in good faith:

31 (a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic

32 work; or

1 (b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or

2 debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or

3 scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public

4 interest; or

5 (c) in making or publishing:

6 (i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of

7 public interest; or

8 (ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest

9 if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held

10 by the person making the comment.

 

Abbott’s objection raises a problem because the current Racial Discrimination Act 1975 contains this section (below) which also uses the phrases to offend and causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public.

 

An act of parliament that during his time in government from 1996 through to 2007 he apparently did not seek to amend to remove the alleged threat to free speech.

 

Tony Abbott appears to have 'found' a censorship trigger within the bill before Federal Parliament just in time for this year’s election campaign.

 

Part IIA—Prohibition of offensive behaviour based on racial hatred

 

18C Offensive behaviour because of race, colour or national or ethnic origin

 

(1) It is unlawful for a person to do an act, otherwise than in private, if:

(a) the act is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people; and

(b) the act is done because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

Note: Subsection (1) makes certain acts unlawful. Section 46P of the Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 allows people to make complaints to the Australian Human Rights Commission about unlawful acts. However, an unlawful act is not necessarily a criminal offence. Section 26 says that this Act does not make it an offence to do an act that is unlawful because of this Part, unless Part IV expressly says that the act is an offence.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an act is taken not to be done in private if it:

(a) causes words, sounds, images or writing to be communicated to the public; or

(b) is done in a public place; or

(c) is done in the sight or hearing of people who are in a public place.

(3) In this section:

public place includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, whether express or implied and whether or not a charge is made for admission to the place.

18D Exemptions

Section 18C does not render unlawful anything said or done reasonably and in good faith:

(a) in the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work; or

(b) in the course of any statement, publication, discussion or debate made or held for any genuine academic, artistic or scientific purpose or any other genuine purpose in the public interest; or

(c) in making or publishing:

(i) a fair and accurate report of any event or matter of public interest; or

(ii) a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment.

How low can Goward go?

I'm betting this statement either came from a NSW Housing press release or the office of NSW Community Services Minister Pru Goward: “Tenants {in public housing} pay some rent, although it's heavily subsidised by the government.”

Yeah, Pru – while you’re trying to paint this type of tenant as a bludger - let’s ignore the fact that they pay at least one quarter of their total household income to the government, week in and week out.

I’m sure there are hundreds of tenants out there who’ll raise a cheer if your seat disappears from under you in 2014, because from Day One you've never shown any empathy or understanding - going so far as to increase their rents because of "the carbon tax".

The Northern Star hosting an ardent coal seam gas supporter or an industry plant?

 

Online mainstream media is perhaps one of the most immediate ways Northern Rivers residents have of voicing an opinion on local or regional issues.

 

However, this individual raises a question.

 

After 93 pro-CSG mining comments in 20 days under The Northern Star articles concerning Metgasco – is three_0 an unusually enthusiastic member of the public or a mining industry plant?

 

In a comment on a 19 January article three_0 appears to admit to being employed in CSG mining, but it is unclear in what capacity he/she is employed.

 

This individual is also very supportive of Metgasco Limited generally and of its CEO, Peter Henderson:

 

* This as a lawful Australian company, employing Australians, supporting local contractors/companies and contributing to the local economy.

 

* You never see a CEO at such grass roots level personally providing factual information about the industry to interested locals. My hat goes off to you Pete.

 

Surely even Metgasgo wouldn’t be so manipulative as to encourage it own company directors/management/staff to protect its interests online without having them also declare a specific pecuniary interest in the debate?

 

Here is three_0’s history between 5-24 January 2013 found at http://www.northernstar.com.au/profile/three_o/.

 

Something to think about in the 2013 federal election year

 ABS trend estimate of unemployed persons

Australia’s unemployment rate is currently running at 5.4% according to the folks who know.

Jericho over at Grog’s Gamut points out that it would be 5.1% if Queensland LNP Premier Campbell Newman hadn’t taken a scythe to that state’s public service after he took office in March 2012.

Now how many times has Tony Abbott held Newman’s government as a pattern card of fiscal responsibility?

Well, there’s this:

“Mr Abbott said it was unfortunate that some of the Newman government's decisions were unpopular, even within its own ranks.

But he said those decisions were necessary and Mr Newman was doing a great job given the "economic basket case" he inherited from Labor.

"Sometimes they cause stresses and strains even within the ranks of the coalition here in Queensland," he said.

"But you've got to do what is necessary to bring this country and this state back to health."

Gee, sorta sounds like Abbott’s plan for the Australian economy doesn’t it?