The Sydney Morning Herald reports that Galaxy has conducted a poll for SBS’s Insight program showing Labor leading 52-48 across a sample of marginal electorates: Dobell, Eden-Monaro, Blair, Moreton, Deakin, Stirling and Wakefield. The average margin in these seats is 3.5 per cent, so this suggests a combined swing of 5.5 per cent.
You don’t know the grounds that these people are possibly inelegible on Glen. There are more grounds than ‘office of profit’.
There have been other instances of possible inelegibility from the Liberal Party on other grounds, including s 44(v). They, however, chose to flaunt the Court of Disputed Returns by passing a resolution in the House and trying to get around it being tested on Constitutional grounds.
It has absolutely nothing to do with a party’s ability to govern and you know that. It’s just grasping at straws and it doesn’t do you any justice.
The 1 TRILLION DOLLAR ECONOMY!
Dr Evil ‘ONE TRILLLLION DOLLARS!’
UNION BOSSES
FANATICAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS
SOCIALIST EXTREMIST WITH KNIVES IN HER HANDBAG
————–
you’re just such sad trainspotting bastards that it’s just toooo tragic for words.
No Mr bovine spongiform, it says more about the rabidness of the left press.
Labor just has to let the libs implode with another failed smear tactic.
Just for comparisons these liberals listed employment are as below. I got that far and became bored.
From Adam Carr
Ross Fox (Liberal) is policy advisor and chief of staff to Senator Michael Ronaldson.
Myles King (Liberal) has been a Victorian Police officer for more than 30 years. He has a masters degree in organisational leadership.
Angela Randell (Liberal) has worked for 30 years in the hospital system, currently as a health information manager, and has a Masters of Public Health.
Thanks Jude and Jon.
I am still waiting for the backlash in Burke affair. When is it going to hit?
Mr Robb said a further search has revealed another 12 Labor candidates have question marks over their validity as candidates, raising the possibility of a spate of by-elections if challenges were upheld (SMH)
Note question marks – not yet a definite accusation. Not stated what the problem was – bu they can settle it by producing the relevant documentation .
Bit hard to know what would be relevant if you don’t know what the question is.
738 Mad Cow.
Speaking for myself, I did it out of pure juvenile gutter humor.
Jackie Kelly had also failed to renounce a foreign citizenship, she was a double dunce.
This is what you get when you have a government party run by lawyers, for lawyers.
Might I make the obvious point.
The tactic was simply being kept in store as a diversion.
AWB..
immigration stuffups..
Turnbull’s blue sky mining..
It is pretty obvious why it hasn’t been used to this point. They know it has no basis and can only be trotted out at the last minute.
I believe there is a prima facie case that the Libs are rooted…
No LTEP i don’t, that said regardless we need the AEC to sort this one out.
Look, look, look all i’ve said is if this is true and several of these candidates are ineligible then Rudd will have egg on his face.
This goes back to Howard saying Labor are a risk and unfit for office because of their inexperience. Well what better way then to show that 13 ALP candidates could be ineligible to stand at the election.
NB, I don’t mind gutter humor either. Beats having to listen to Downer.
worked a train out of eastwood today during the 10 mins i was there spoke to a chinese guy abt 40 he reakons that abt more than half his community is going with labor
Doug @ 757,
They have got to assume that the relevant documentation must be relating to them not holding offices for profit under the Crown. That sort of stuff should be readily available (they are resignation letters, after all) or they should have legal advice drawn up showing that they never were holders of offices for profit under the Crown.
704 Jim – Get your hand off it mate. In our society, you need to prove someone’s guilt. You don’t need to prove your innocence. Therefore please show us the respect of recognising this for what it is – a baseless scare campaign scarcely bearing any resemblance to reality.
The AEC doesn’t determine eligbility to stand as far as I’m aware. It will be decided by the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns AFTER the election. Nothing can be done about it before then.
@744 Pancho
Maybe Darth Vadar can say it to make it even more…..real….?…
‘(Deep breathing) Can you trust the Labor with the 1.1 TRILLION dollar economy?’
Bahahahahaa! What a load of bollocks!
On Tony Zappia from Nov 15:
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,22760578-2682,00.html
“LABOR candidate for Makin Tony Zappia has defended his decision to remain Salisbury mayor despite concerns interstate over a similar case.
Mr Zappia told The Advertiser yesterday he was comfortable with his decision after seeking legal advice.”
[No LTEP i don’t, that said regardless we need the AEC to sort this one out.]
We also need the coalition to stop being morons.
[Look, look, look all i’ve said is if this is true and several of these candidates are ineligible then Rudd will have egg on his face.]
No. It just means there will be by-elections at a cost of $1 million each. I’m sure tax payers will really appreciate throwing all that money down the drain.
[This goes back to Howard saying Labor are a risk and unfit for office because of their inexperience. ]
No. It goes to Howard knowing he is screwed.
Glen @ 763,
This is the key problem here – the Libs have alleged a bunch of stuff but have not lodged a complaint with the AEC. This shows that they know they have got nothing, but are trying to denigrate the Labor candidate through innuendo and rumour rather than substantive fact…
Glen:
[‘No LTEP i don’t, that said regardless we need the AEC to sort this one out.
Look, look, look all i’ve said is if this is true and several of these candidates are ineligible then Rudd will have egg on his face.
This goes back to Howard saying Labor are a risk and unfit for office because of their inexperience. Well what better way then to show that 13 ALP candidates could be ineligible to stand at the election.’]
Let the AEC sort it out.
If all is this is false and none of the candidates are ineligible then the Liberals will have egg on their face.
This goes back to Howard lynig all the tmie about Labor being a risk and unfit for office because of their inexperience. Well what better way then to show Howard again lying through his stooges that he is the worst, most deceptive PM in the history of our country.
Lets hope this backfires badly for the Liberals.
AWB bribes never happened and the kids were indeed thrown overboard.
The truth is finally coming out in the last days of Babylon…WMD will be found in those 13 marginal electorates..trust me!
Dave, New Zealand is in our Constitution.
They should have been a State in our Federation but they didn’t want to.
If she was Russian or Polish or Italian then you’d have problems but a Kiwi who gives a rats, it was a technical problem really.
LTEP asked why I thought Labor safes weren’t swinging as much as Coalition safes and marginals. The answer is Newspoll’s Sept analysis.
The truth of the matter isn’t the issue here – its the way the media portray it that will count.
2 scenarios – which headline do you think is most likely?
1) “13 Labor Candidates Ineligible” or
2) “Liberals Desperate Smear Campaign”
My money is on 1).
Would love to see the MSM finally turn on Howard & expose this kind of desperate tactic, but I cant see it happening.
I think this could be very damaging given the timing.
From the SMH:
So they’ve got nothing and are on a fishing expedition. The onus should be on the person making the allegation to name the grounds of ineligibility.
It does seem obvious that this is a desperate diversionary tactic by a party led by scum. They have trawled the list of occupations following on from the Newhouse allegation and come with their hit-list. Their thinking would have been “Let’s see what we can find and maybe something will come of it”. Time is now wasted while Labor organises the rebuttals and the focus shifts from the Liberal disaster zone. Smears are designed to obfuscate and confuse.
Glen either that is the smell of utter rank pathetic desperation or you just soiled yourself.
I reckon I can get a legal opinion that says all Tories are stupid. Good Grief!
Jim I’m happy to take you through the results of a google search with said language related to Howard. What you’ll discover is most of the hits aren’t ‘press’. They’re ordinary people.
I was expecting Rudd to gain some nasty language somewhere but when I actually did the search I was quite impressed. The norty language was being applied to Liberals.
You know it’s quite possible that the term ‘lying’.. is actually truthful. Remember how Reith left in the nick of time?
re: 13 ALP candidates ineligible
oh NOOOO, we are in deep sh*t!! 🙁
betting markets have already moved away from ALP!!
LassetersSport pulls off Aus. Federal Election offer
STOP PRESS –
Andrew Robb claims Rudd ineligible due to winnings at Melbourne Cup
“Dave, New Zealand is in our Constitution.
They should have been a State in our Federation but they didn’t want to.”
From memory, I believe they voted to be part of the Commonwealth.
“This goes back to Howard saying Labor are a risk and unfit for office because of their inexperience. Well what better way then to show that 13 ALP candidates could be ineligible to stand at the election.”
That is a BIG stretch, and once again you know it. We are not fools here Glen. At any rate, the allegations will be false. As has already been pointed out, if they were genuine, then Robb would have gone to the AEC with the evidence. Apart from that, 13 is very unbelievable. Maybe one or two, possibly on both sides of politics, might be believable. But not 13, many of which also happen to be in marginal seats – now there’s a surprise.
So, don’t worry Glen, it is still safe to vote for Labor.
Glen thinks a baseless smear by a senior liberal, with absolutely not supporting evidence, that cannot and will not be resolved before the election, is somehow a bad reflection on the ALP.
This is the 1996 ‘letter’ all over again, and it is going to push that 2PP up of the ALP by an extra point, if not more.
just joking
hahahhahhh 🙂
775 Glen
Is that true about NZ? Where?
It’s odd – both Sky News and the SMH are focusing on the Newhouse questions without talking much (or at all in regards to Sky) about the 12 other candidates. It’s only the Herald Sun and the News Ltd papers that are talking about the 12 others.
ShowsOn true but if the ALP had candidates who all knew the procedures then we wouldn’t be where we are. If by-elections are held it’s not our fault the ALP will have cost the taxpayers 1million each.
Glen, not a technical problem at all. Are you seriously arguing that New Zealand is not obviously a ‘foreign power’ within the meaning of s44(i)?
As it’s quite clear New Zealand is a foreign power it’s not a technicality. Now, if it had been British citizenship it would’ve been a technicality.
Anyone wondering why the Coalition didn’t try this at the last election with some of the same candidates? For instance, I thought Zappia ran at the ’04 election. Why did they not raise his eligibility problem at that stage?
I’m not as passionate about the different parties as many of you here obviously are but my grandfather instilled in me a passion for honesty and integrity and my parents showed me the virtue of diligence and efficiency. To add to that I have a personal fealty for our language and an absolute disgust for the torture she must endure at the hands of the phalanx of spivs, urgers, twicers, dissemblers and outright deceivers that control the public fora in this society. I know quite a few others like me. It’s not so much that I will be voting Labor or even Rudd, it’s that I can, due to my aforementioned special interests, no more countenance voting LNP, ESPECIALLY Howard, than I can swallow poison. This latest “13 ineligible’ thing only reinforces my position.
This is unfortunate for Joe Hockey. I was feeling confident of a Labor victory and under those circumstances was happy to repay Joe’s position on the recent stem cell legislation, especially given the weight he was put under by the despicable religious putsch, but given this latest effort I no longer want to risk it. I thought that given the possible outcome from the upcoming election the Liberal party would need people like Joe hockey around, it was a lesser of two evils decision. I see a necessity for a strong opposition but I see a stronger necessity to get rid of the most malignant influence on Australian debate today.
Chalk up another vote for Mike Bailey from 2065. Time for a less vile bunch of reprobates.
The QC opinion that Newhouse got was to the effect that resignation from the Government position takes effect once you nominate for parliament. So you don’t need to formally submit a resignation letter. I doubt that anything to this effect is written in the relevant statutes just as I am sure there is nothing written that you have to tender a formal resignation letter.
The Courts will judge any case that comes before them on the intention of the draftees of the legislation and the intention of the parties. I think commonsense will ultimately prevail in that it was clearly the intention of the candidate to resign from their Government role once they nominated.
It is definately a storm in a teacup. But as the Libs have nothing else to run with, I expect that they will go hard on this as nothing can be proven until after the election.
I doubt the public will be so gullible as to believe that this is a genuine issue, so close to the election date. Rather it is a desperate ploy from a Government that is on its way out.
My Google search for ‘Jim’, ‘self-righteous’ and ‘prat’ turned up 17,900 hits.
As the allegations can only be tested after the election this can’t go anywhere – just accusation and denial.
Labor need to be a little more quick about than with Newhouse – but all they need to do is deny it and then claim a desperate tricky Liberal party etc.
It will be more interesting to see how they sycophants play it out.
150 ALP candidates claimed to be ineligible due to links to Union Bosses…
Election over guys!
Ja Mei
I never said the burden of proof was reversed. Just that you cant dismiss an allegation before any of the facts are known. The allegation may prove to be either correct or false.
If you know all the facts please present them. Otherwise, back in your box chocolate.
788FF
You had me going too…