In the meantime:
• The Australian reports the dunce of the Senate, Steve Fielding, is contemplating adding constitutional vandal to the extensive list of black marks against his name. Fielding polled all of 2.7 per cent of the vote in Victoria on Saturday, yet remains a serious prospect to retain his Senate seat thanks to a disastrous electoral system that Labor has been determined not to reform.
• Today’s Sydney Morning Herald editorial offers some fascinating speculation about Tony Abbott’s tactics in the past few days. The paper’s national editor, Mark Davis, detects a high-stakes game with the objective of final victory at a fresh election. It is evident he will be backed to the hilt in this endeavour by The Australian, which has jacked up the hysteria today by (among other things) running a lead news story that describes former Office of National Assessments intelligence analyst Andrew Wilkie as a “radical”.
• On Wednesday, the News Limited tabloids published a Galaxy poll of 600 voters in the rural independents’ electorates of Kennedy, New England and Lyne, which predictably showed a 52 per cent supporting a Coalition government against 36 per cent for Labor. Respondents were evenly split as to whether they wanted a fresh election. Some national polling at the moment would be uncommonly interesting.
• There has been talk of a legal challenge, or at least the possibility of one, against the election of Coalition candidates Russell Matheson in Macarthur and Natasha Griggs in Solomon, on the basis that their position as councillors runs foul of the archaic constitutional requirement that candidates not enjoy “office for profit under the Crown”. Constitutional expert George Williams has been quoted saying such a challenge would have a “one-in-four chance of winning”. Labor successfully engineered a re-match in Lindsay in similar circumstances after the 1996 election, only to have the voters respond to their sore-loser act by delivering a further 5 per cent swing to the successful Liberal candidate, Jackie Kelly.
UPDATE: Here is a link to the Brisbane late counting thread, which has dropped off the front page. I’ll come up with a more enduring solution to this issue later today.
rosa – yes very few people will be able to pay the millions for rights to AFL and NRL, or for live telecast of the EPL, NFL, MLB
And if it is streamable on the internet, people will be able to record and send to other people. The internet will not be able to make as much profit to buy rights to those
Doesn’t strike me as their kind of nun. Not y’r buxom wench, not y’r pliant smiley type. More like y’r don’t mess with me Maggie Smith schoolma’am. Give her a skullful of blood & her glare would curdle it.
[there will be bad years in the future]
That’s the point, Dovif. In bad years (i.e low commodity prices) the miners will not be paying as much tax as they currenly are.
[ http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/08/27/abbotts-public-service-freeze-could-devastate-the-oz/
almost makes you want abbott as pm *shudders*]
But the adverts are the only part of the OO that I read
[If you can vote for an independent and get a conservative Govt why would anyone ever vote National]
Good question by PVO.
[If you can vote for an independent and get a conservative Govt why would anyone ever vote National]
Why would you ever vote National anyway?
GG and BIAS
The OO has made much of the fcat that the GG’s daughter is married to a lbour politician.
It also mentions that the GG’s daughter’s father was an ex-liberal politician, but saw no issue with that.
Now I may be slow but the woudn’t thje GG have some sort of relationship with the GG’s daughter’s father
ruawake
has PVO an opinion on the state of play with the indies?
Waiting for a result feels like a replay of the WA state election where I was hoping good sense would prevail and was proved wrong. I dont want to jinx anything though. Some things are very different.
1. The ALP policy and preparation is solid. Julia could stand at the press conference today and speak with confidence on that.
2. Julia is a well respected and experienced player in the parliament. The independents know her mettle. She looks better each time she steps up.
3. These guys are genuine independents of long standing – not the experimental independent (the National Party was never really going to back Labor) that the inexperienced Grylls was.
I like the way Oakeshott said he won’t be worrying about losing his seat. I can tell you from personal experience that this bloke is a beauty and Lyne is lucky to have him after all those years of Vaille and the Nationals.
If I lived in Lyne I’d have a hard time not giving him my vote and that’s really saying something from an old rusted on Laborite. Nobody will take that seat off him while ever he wants it. Oakeshott’s win in 07 was terrific against a great Labor candidate and a dud National but his previous abdication from the State Nationals helped his image a lot. He deserves every vote he gets.
The independents should demand media reform, and they should demand it, who does the Murdoch press think they are, no doubt they want fielding to block the bills to create a crisis and then they can rip into the independents through their papers and the Greens and any other minor grouping who wants fair dinkum reform of parliamentary procedures which News Ltd does not want as scrutiny and process is evil to them and hinders big business. Their game is absolutely pathetic at present- who do these people think they are?
[ruawake
has PVO an opinion on the state of play with the indies?]
He has not expressed one. He is copping flak over his election prediction on Sat. night.
if the indies back abbott because they they fear he would destabilize and try and get another election from opposition then I give up. Over it.
All the independents should go with Labor, i cannot see the Libs lasting three years, their policies would be blocked and they would not be so forthcoming to the independents . The view that the independents five of 150 is absurd it is democracy it is what we voted for and the idoits at News Ltd should respect the situation.
Also on LP’s Laura Tingle’s post
Glad to see it confirmed in writing. I wonder if those signing up for entrance have reached 200,000, or The Times (paper) deficit is now climbing at an extra quarter of a million quid a day.
Lips, don’t smile!
Oakeshott did not stand at the 2007 election
[I’ve just heard David Salter on this. He says it may be only the columnists, that the news itself would be available. He also said the Rupert, when asked about how all this was going in his trial in Britain, replied that it was “encouraging”. That, he says, is code for “disastrous”.]
This is not surprising. His newspapers offer zero unique columns – anyone else with a browser can get the same news for free elsewhere. Not to mention his publications spew garbage 101% of the time
William
re Senate Counting system
As you know, and outlined in my submission to the parliament in 2008, the Senate counting rules are seriously flawed, in that they are not proportional or mathematically correct. The AEC also is in denial and in the process has compromised its professional integrity.
The method used by the AEC in calculating the Surplus Transfer value is based on the number of ballot papers and not the value of the votes.
The other issue of concern is the method of segmentation and distribution of preferences from excluded candidates. When a candidate is excluded from the count their ballot papers should be distributed as if that Candidate has not stood.
The solution is simple.
Introduce a proper mathematical calculation of the surplus transfer value based on the value of the vote. And on every exclusion reset and restart the count.
This process or reiteration in the count on every exclusion continuing until all vacancies are filled in a single iteration that includes only transfer of surplus. One single transaction per candidate on each iteration. Surplus or exclusion. Remainders remain with the value of the voting paper as it progresses through the count.
The other option, as you proposed, is to deny voters the right of casting a preference and to adopt a Party List system.
Personally I prefer the STV preferential system, provided the method of counting the vote is proportional and reflects the intentions of the voters. The current system does not.
We know this is the case because when we analyzed the 2007 Queensland Senate vote the Greens candidate Larissa Waters should have been elected to the sixth spot (Method of distributing preferences of excluded candidates distorts the voters intentions).
In Victoria the other issue related to the method of calculating the Surplus Transfer value delivered the Green a bonus 7,000 votes bolstering the Liberal GTV at the expense of the minor parties. This could have cost the ALP its rightful third senate seat had one nation preferences the Liberal party ahead of the ALP and the Greens in that order).
I do not believe Fielding will be elected. He would need to out-poll the DLP who in tun needs to out-poll the Liberal Party or the ALPs Third Candidate.
This is their right to be elected on the basis of preferences and the order of election.
Yes fix the system of counting but do not throw the baby out with the bath water.
]Oakeshott did not stand at the 2007 election]
Oakeshott Country- sorry, he won the byelection after Vaille quit in 2008.
ruawake
did PVO predict a landslide?
[824 Scalckboy72
Murali was a chucker.
The ICC changed the “chucking” rule when slow motion video revealed that just about every bowler bent their arm more than 5 degrees, so they either had to change the rule or ban most bowlers in first class cricket.]
the ICC changed the rule for fast bowlers to be allowed a 5 degree bend and spinners to have a 15 degree bend. This was done solely for Murali’s benefit as no other international spinner comes close to 15 degrees.
Compare Warne’s and Murali’s records- Warne took wickets in every country at a good average and played more test os than in Australia. Murali played the vast majority of his tests (97 out of 133) and took most of his wickets (612 out of 800) on the subcontinent and played around 20% of his tests against weak teams such as Bangladesh. Warne only played 3 tests against such teams.
He may be a nice person, but his bowling action was flawed and he was not the worlds best bowler.
Indeed and there was no Labor candidate but Rob Drew (Nat) was certainly a disaster. Oakeshott’s pv has gone down by 15% but the ALP on this occasion won 13% – I suspect
his popularity is as strong as ever.
BH – As they say in politics, the best way to win an election is not to worry about winning the election. Oakeshott stays true to that and he’ll do fine.
Murali had a congenital bend in his arm. Optical illusion. Get over it.
The Libs latest theme seems to be that a Labor-Green coalition is being cooked up and it will be a disaster for the country.
909 – it’s a shame PVO is copping it for that prediction. I know he was way off and that’s a lot to do with inexperience, but frankly I like a commentator who has a bit of a go and is sometimes wrong, instead of those who sit on the fence then profess to be know-alls with hindsight.
[AntonyGreenABC
#ausvotes Denison to be re-counted to ensure Wilkie passes Libs into 2nd place on Green preferences]
ruawake
the libs theme is to go back to the Polls.
OC – I liked the Labor candidate in 07 – did better against Vaille than before but not well enough but if you ask in my electorate nextdoor who do you want for a candidate it is Oakeshott’s name that come up. He’s well known and visits often but we’re the wrong side of the Highway for him.
William and others…
I contacted the AEC about the discrepancies in the published reports on the Declaration vote tally where more votes are recorded as being counted then issued and returned.
Much more needs to be done by the AEC to fix this glaring omission and errors in its reporting. This issue was also addressed and raise in my previous submission to the JSCEM (Joint Select Committee on Electoral Matters). Nothing was done to fix it.
This makes the declaration statements virtually useless and unreliable.
Surely the AEC knows who many ballot papers have been issued and hopefully returned as a result of the polling place/divisional returns on election day. Without this information how do you know what is outstanding and still to be accounted for.
The collection of this data should be via an on line reporting system and should also provide a means of check balancing back to the returns. It should also be possible to get a breakdown as to from where and who issued the ballot papers
Below is their reply. ( I thought I should publish this as this issue was raised in other threads)
UNCLASSIFIED
Mr van der Craats
The figures displayed in the Virtual Tally Room are drawn from data individually entered by staff in our divisional offices around the country. Staff are currently very focused on the counting process, in order to finalise the results of this election, and not all have data entered other figures, such as envelopes issued and received, used for balancing purposes.
As necessary data entry is progressively undertaken over the coming days, figures in the VTR will reflect fully the numbers of declaration votes on hand.
Regards
Roger Wills | Assistant Director
Voter Services Delivery
Elections Branch
Australian Electoral Commission
Who is Muralitharan backing for PM? 😆
Surely the independents do not want to miss this once in a lifetime opportunity to implement some key parliamentary reforms therefore they will do everything to form a govt and this is likely to be the ALP who will be willing to embrace these reforms vs the Libs. therefore despite News Ltd the likelihood of another election is slim as the Indi’s will not let this opportunity slip away.
D@W @915, can you break that down for me how that works, in simple terms.. maybe a simple concrete example?
918 – no tone:
Warne’s record in India is rubbish.
Personally I have problems with Murali’s action, but I write for a cricket web site, and on the boards there this thing has been done to death. When they changed the rule, they looked at the actions of all international bowlers, and the only one who didn’t actually “chuck” within the meaning of the old law, was, IIRC, Marlon Samuels.
I look at it this way. Irrespective of whether his action was kosher or not, he was allowed to play. That being so, who am I to discredit his (very significant) achievements?
ruawake@927
Darrell Hair
[3. These guys are genuine independents of long standing – not the experimental independent (the National Party was never really going to back Labor) that the inexperienced Grylls was.]
I’ve had the misfortune of sitting in meetings with Grylls and can confidently state that his mental age is about 15. Mind you, that put him a good couple of years ahead of the members of the WA Ute Club who he was there to support.
Glad to see channel 10 calling it 72-72 and taking Crook out as he has requested. Hilarious to see Abbott call his backflip a victory for him!! I wonder why he relented? Was he told it was game over if he didnt?? Otherwise why take the risk? There is the leaked 600m hole, plus the $6b from veteran indexation, plus the $1b PBS, plus the education rebate shortfall. And did you think the treasury officials, having been bagged by the libs, may find a few more??
Makes Grylls success all the more amazing & frankly his mental abilities as determined by your good self would still put him ahead of most of the Barnett cabinet.
[As they say in politics, the best way to win an election is not to worry about winning the election. ]
Yeah, I hear people in politics say that all the time.
I am wondering why the Murdoch hacks have gone the “new election” line so quickly. Arent they jumping the gun. And whoever suggested the indies might back Abbott because he may stabilise in opposition- dont be ridiculous. The stability of the minority govt rests on an agreement on confidence motions, the opposition is irrelevant
I thought Labor’s candidate in 2007 was quite bizarre but the one in 2004 should have been elected. I agree we are very lucky.
Why the hell has Dennison been called then, Mr Green?
Ch 10 mentioned Boothby? I presume it will result in a recount? Whats the low down
Oz pol –
[Doesn’t strike me as their kind of nun. Not y’r buxom wench, not y’r pliant smiley type. More like y’r don’t mess with me Maggie Smith schoolma’am. Give her a skullful of blood & her glare would curdle it.]
I didn’t say that she was doing reception! lol
Death stare – Tingle vs Bishop
Odds anyone? I’d tip Tingle!
Personally I thought Murali’s stock standard delivery was OK. The problem with Murali was his fast (change of pace) ball especially in his early years. It really fizzed through quickly and he got a lot of wickets trapping batsmen LBW in front because they were surprised by the pace. I thought that was pretty sus. He still had a great standard spinning delivery, but without that fast ball I doubt he would have gotten so many wickets so quickly. Remember it took Warne several years to get up to his full range of deliveries.
I don’t get Boothby. Has anyone got a plausible description of what actually happened? And a summary of the maximum realistic effect it could have on the vote. And why, if it cannot change the result, you’d have a recount?
OOpps. I mean re-poll not recount.
[Who is Muralitharan backing for PM?
Darrell Hair]
Now Hair would make a great speaker! 😉
Andrew
Abbott has to play this on two fronts. The Libs played hard with the indies at first, to show the Nats they are going to play hard.
Abbott and Co., are more wedged in this situation than Labor I believe.
They have to appease their National Party members, whilst negotiating with indies.
There is obviously bad blood between the Nats and the Indies, and the Libs need to get them all in the tent. I actually think Labor should be able to form govt more easily in these circumstances.
From the AFR today
[When he was leader of Government Business, Mr Abbott took up cudgels against Mr Windsor when allegations of attempted bribery were made against former deputy prime minister John Anderson.
“Independent members of this parliament like to sugges that they are not contaminated by partisanship” he told parliament in 2003.
“Independent members…are no different and no better – perhaps in some ways worse – than the rest of us, because they do not have the sorts of responsibilities to a team that the rest of us have in this place”]
Can’t we just banish anyone who plays, talks about or cares about cricket to the Antarctic 🙂