Before I proceed, a plug for the Westpoll WA state poll post, which this post is bumping from the top of the page.
Moreton extends from the southern Brisbane riverside suburbs of Oxley, Sherwood and Yeronga out to Runcorn and Acacia Ridge in the south, the latter area being the more favourable for Labor. It was one of nine Queensland seats gained by Labor at the 2007 election, of which it and two others stayed with the party in 2010. The seat has existed in name since federation, but was based on the Gold Coast and Brisbane’s southern outskirts until the creation of McPherson in 1949. It then began a long drift north into the inner suburbs, making marginal a seat that had once been safely conservative. The first near-miss came with Jim Killen’s famous 130-vote win in 1961, achieved with help from Communist Party preference leakage, which allowed the Menzies government to survive with a one-seat majority. Labor would not get over the line until 1990, when Liberal veteran Don Cameron was unseated by Garrie Gibson.
Gibson suffered a small adverse swing in 1993 before succumbing to a further 4.9% swing amid the Queensland tidal wave of 1996. The new Liberal member was Gary Hardgrave, a former children’s television host and media adviser to Senator David MacGibbon. Hardgrave held junior ministry positions from 2001 to 2005 while maintaining a tenuous grip on his seat, surviving a 4.2% swing in 1998 and an unfavourable redistribution in 2004. Redistribution further chipped away at his margin before the 2007 election, and he was unseated by a 7.5% swing to Labor in 2007. He has since kept in the public eye as the drive presenter on Fairfax Radio’s Brisbane station 4BC.
The seat has since been held for Labor by Graham Perrett, previously an adviser to the Queensland Resources Council and earlier a state ministerial staffer and official with the Queensland Independent Education Union. Perrett enjoyed what proved to be a decisive 1.4% boost at the redistribution before the 2010 election, at which a 4.9% swing cut his margin to 1.1%. He made the news in his first term with the publication of his “erotic novel”, The Twelfth Fish, and in his second when he threatened to quit parliament if Labor changed leaders again, a position he backed away from when Kevin Rudd was marshalling his unsuccessful leadership challenge in February 2012.
The Liberal National Party has gain preselected its candidate from 2010, Malcolm Cole, a former Courier-Mail journalist and late Howard-era staffer to Alexander Downer and Santo Santoro. For the 2010 election the LNP initially preselected Michael Palmer, the 20-year-old son of Clive, which was seen as a measure of the Coalition’s bleak electoral prospects at the time. This together with the preselection of Wyatt Roy in Longman drew considerable derision, and some skepticism was expressed when Palmer withdrew on health grounds.
[Yes, she came across as very bitter. And from what I’ve heard of her since, her bitternness doesn’t seem to have abated]
Fess, a pity because i really do like her works
Mod lib, i even hold my screen above you name , so do t get any ideas i read u
The thing that sadens me is your gravartor
Don’t tell me that darn rummel has taken my tag again?????
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/excop-finds-an-ally-in-battle-to-clear-name-20120713-2219q.html
I used to have quite a lot to do with Mr Tanner, after he’d left the police force.
Cops I knew would say to me, “He’s a great bloke. Great cop. Shouldn’t have done what he did, though.”
[Mod lib, i even hold my screen above you name , so do t get any ideas i read u
The thing that sadens me is your gravartor]
Why?
[Mod lib, i even hold my screen above you name ]
my say, i do have soft spot for Mod, even though sometimes he’s a dicko
Mod Lib,
Do you ever pause for breath to reflect on exactly what it is that you so vociferously and energetically support?
Or simply enjoy wasting your time thinking up smart-arsk rejoinders?
grey
Thank you for your thoughtful and considered post. Do you feel better now?
I have not been a member of the ALP for the past ten or twelve years but was a member for many years.
I do not need any gratuitous advice from you on how I should approach politics but at my age I am well past the point of having to grow up.
BTW Are you a member of the ALP?
[Mod Lib,
Do you ever pause for breath to reflect on exactly what it is that you so vociferously and energetically support?
Or simply enjoy wasting your time thinking up smart-arsk rejoinders?]
Exactly what am I vociferously and energetically supporting?
Have you all noticed celebs, are always celebs, it doesnt matter what , sickness they have, what divorce they have, how many pregnancies, how many times they change their clothes
They have to tell us. Thats why i dont get parents who let their children e nter talent quests
[C@tmomma
Posted Saturday, July 14, 2012 at 8:53 am | Permalink
my say,
What makes my skin crawl about ‘Modern Liberals’ is they are proud to be selfish and heartless, and support to the hilt the man that epitomises it.]
To be fair, I don’t think Mod Lib or rummel do support Abbott. They have made it clear enough on a number of occasions that they regard him as an embarrassment.
However, in a more general context I think there is a lot of truth in what you say. The Howard legacy did indeed leave a lot of selfishness and heartlessness which Abbott is now using for his own ends.
Well i d say its the case with most of us, me included, doubt many people read what i post.
But i read people with vision, and love in their heart , for the future,
So my scroll list is bigg er
C:-) @catomma, so glad your here , ,
morning bludgers
Gaffhook
I saw your question. Been thinking the same thing. It does appear from reportage, that the source points to Ashby. But as ordered, Lewis only has to cough up the document if this the case. If it is another source, he is protected by the Act in place.
Therefore, the question is will Lewis play it straight or not
Just to keep our feet on the ground, so to speak. This is real.
[Greenpeace Australia @GreenpeaceAustP
“The most extreme predictions of Arctic warming have been outpaced by what has happened in reality” #SaveTheArctic http://bit.ly/svarct ]
Darn
Sorry disagree of course they do, liberals only ever want power it doesnt matter whom
Please dont kid yourself
@MTBW 58
Yes I am, and I support the leader, whoever it is. I wasn’t being gratuitous in my advice either. Moaners annoy me, always have. You are one.
rummel
And before you counter with something about the Antarctic, try to understand that the two polar circles do not respond in exactly the same way to AGW.
Mega today is again worth a read.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/howard-rudd-and-gillard-all-let-opposition-damn-bright-ideas/story-e6frgd0x-1226425615894
Hockey’s black hole is growing by the day.
Good morning all
I see that the reactionaries are delighted with the Watermelon War, as well they might be. The prospect of the Greens Party trashing the centre left vote is a reactionary wet dream, after all. The immediate prize is the a leadership spill against Ms Gillard. The medium term prize is the Greens Party losing BOP in the Senate. The long term prize is reactionary governments for the next decade. Win-Win-Win.
No wonder the reactionaries are drooling. ‘The Weekend Australian’ has wall-to-wall articles on the topic, from various perspectives.
The sooner Labor destroys the Greens Party, the better. The premise is that the Greens Party will never form a government and is therefore condemned forever to act as a centre left spoiler. Labor cannot destroy the Greens Party by physical force. It can only do so with soft power and with force of argument. This can only come from a clear commitment to the environment as something other than a political disposal. On largely symbolic, but symbolically important matters, Labor should adopt a standard approach of allowing coscience votes. Examples would be: euthanasia and equal marriage.
Whether the Greens have a monopoly on ‘integrity’ or whether they are ‘right’ on some policies compared to Labor or whether Greens supporters have this or that good or bad quality are all, at the most basic level, irrelevant. What is relevant is that the existence of the Greens Party is destructive of the centre left vote. A cursory examination of Greens policies demonstrates that they do not seriously anticipate becoming a government. Some examples: their policies appear to be uncosted. They don’t even know whether they are going to impose a tax on farmland and water holders.
The reactionaries and Labor are currently, to a significant extent, two sides of the same coin on the environment. Labor has to differentiate itself from the reactionaries to gain enough credibility to regain from the Greens Party its lost supporters.
Mr Robb, the three East Coast Coalition premiers have made it perfectly clear that they are happy to destroy the environment where it conflicts with development. As Mr Robb said, ‘…it is visceral.’ Labor does the same thing with its slavish approach to ‘jobs’: it does not let the environment get in the way of the holy grail of jobs. Some current large examples of where Labor does is not commited to triple bottom line sustainability: the lost opportunities of the MDB Plan, the huge amount of money being pissed away on ‘clean coal’, the diesel subsidies being provided to the miners, and Labor’s addiction to subsidising a car manufacturing industry which is still building 6 cylinder monsters after a quarter of century of AGW science.
It will not be until Labor finds a way of developing policies around the concept of triple bottom line sustainability that it will differentiate itself from the reactionaries on one side and from the extremist Reds on the other side.
Lizzie before i go
We did a cruise up to top of alaska few years ago, the photos of where glacziers where and are now is scary, we actualky saw one slip in to the ocean
Pity i,- cannot put the photos here,
The effects where felt down as far as vancouver , rivers floiding , but no rai n.it was there late summer
grey
Dogmatic smart ars*s annoy me, always have. You are one.
Darn,
That is a disingenuous defense by them, don’t you think? When it comes time to put pencil to paper at the election, they will both vote for the party that that man leads. This will be an implicit vote of support for the policies he has.
Anyone watching 24? Apparently Sinodinos is “defending” LNP on asylum seekers.
[#auspol How low will the Libs get – LNP Senator Sinnodinos calls the Prime Minister “Road kill”]
[“The most extreme predictions of Arctic warming have been outpaced by what has happened in reality” #SaveTheArctic http://bit.ly/svarct ]
lizzie:
The past week or two have seen many articles in the msm which suggest the reality of the effects of AGW have exceeded the predictions.
The latest report I saw concerned insurance premiums which have sky-rocketed in the wake of extreme weather events across the country in recent years.
@71
Fair enough. No hard feelings….
Morning, my say.
Is it wet where you are? We’re drowning (well, not really) 🙂
[Bushfire Bill
You missed my Q last night.
With your excellent predictions with Ashby Lewis case do you think Lewis will produce a fake “Godwin Grant” type document during the week to show the judge there is someone else so he can protect their confidentiality?]
I think the judge’s instructions to Lews to basically go away and have a good think about things is code for “Discuss it with your barrister.”
[But Alec Leopold, SC, for Lewis, said the document may reveal the identity of another confidential source. In that case, Mr Lewis is protected under the Evidence Amendment (Journalists’ Privilege) Act 2011.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/reporter-refuses-to-give-up-document-in-slipper-case-20120713-2219w.html#ixzz20Xv5IcJ6 ]
Not sure whether Alec Leopold is being cute there, but if he really doesn’t know the fine details of the document in question, then the judge has given him a fairly clear indication that he wants him to find out.
Lewis can show Leopold any confidential documents he has, because they remain confidential under legal professional privilege. That’s the idea of having an SC representing you.
However, SCs have lives to lead, and they are under an obligation not to lie to a judge. If they lie their career is finished.
They also have an obligation not to let their clients lie to a judge. If a client indicates that he will be lying in evidence the the SC has to quit the case.
So, to come to your question, if Lewis manufactures a document, or if Leopold even believes he has manufactured a document, there is an ethical question for Leopold.
No matter what you may think about lawyers and their tricky ways, they are officers of the Court (especially SCs). They value their livelihoods and their reputations much more than they care for fortunes of a casual paying customer like Lewis.
The key here is that Leopold has only said Lewis “might” have another confidential source. He either doesn’t know for sure, or he’s trying to argue an abstract legal point, almost divorced from the facts.
In the former case – he doesn’t know – then the judge has indicated he wants him to find out.
In the latter case – he’s trying to avoid the factual situation by arguing a theoretical one – the time for that is fast coming to an end… unless Leopold is planning to run the very first test case of the new Evidence Act (including the Wilkie Amendment from April last year), he must advise Lewis to comply, because the judge has ordered it.
We have to rely on our courts being ethical institutions. That means the judges aren’t crooked and the barristers who assist the courts never knowingly lie, or permit a lie to be told.
If Leopold knows, or finds out for certain that Lewis’ contention has no substance, then Leopold has a duty to advise his client to produce the document under subpoena. Lewis has been instructed by the judge to decide whether he really wants to continue his resistance to the subpoena. He will do this under ethical advice from Leopold, his SC.
Lewis has now been ordered to declare, under oath, that he is covered by the Wilkie Amendments. Leopold can’t advise him do this if that is not true. If Lewis still goes ahead, then Leopold must resign from the case. That would be a sensation. We’d all know why he was resigning.
You have to remember that this isn’t a doorstop interview, or a tame pre-recorded piece to camera with Chris Uhlmann, or even a thundering editorial or opinion piece whre “he-said/she-said” rules. This is a court where you swear an oath to tell the truth. There’s no mucking about anymore. Lewis either has to front with the subpoenaed documents or truthfully tell the court why he won’t.
The law says a journalist can’t be compelled to produce documents or provide names that would reveal the identity of a confidential source, if he has previously promised a source confidentiality.
The judge has said that confidentiality doesn’t apply to anything between Ashby and Lewis, because Lewis has already “let the cat out of the bag” (as the judge put it) via the radio interview with
HadleySmith.But I guess it’s possible that some of the documents related to Ashby also name some other confidential source. Even naming them “in passing” would probably protect Lewis (and, of course, the source).
On the other hand, I find it odd that Lewis just has to declare a “promise” and that the court would meekly accept that. Perhaps the judge himself can have a quick squizz to see what Lewis is getting at.
Another thing that might be considered is whether you have to make a specific promise not to disclose (and prove that you did) or whether the promise is implied in any dealings between a journalist and his source.
It may also be possible to redact certain parts of documents so that the other source besides Ashby is not named.
There are a hundred ways this thing can be strung out if Lewis and his lawyers decide to play hard ball.
Remember: the anti-government forces are winning as long as Slipper remains out of the Speaker’s Chair. The government is on a parliamentary knife’s edge until Slipper returns. Appeals on arcane legal points involved with untested legislation might drag out for months.
It all hinges on the assessment by Leopold as to whether he should advise his client to disclose the documents (and names), to withhold them, or not to ask directly, instead turning this into a minefield of legal technicalities before we even get to the factual nitty-gritty of just who is named in the documents.
If Leopold still uses the word “might” next week we’ll have a better idea of where this is going.
[Darn
Sorry disagree of course they do, liberals only ever want power it doesnt matter whom
Please dont kid yourself]
Mysay:
You forgot the bits about liberals only ever wanting death and destruction and how they eat children and burn stuff down for no reason and punch people in the face without a cause, and how they rape and pillage…
or is that stuff coming in the next post?
Boerwar
[It will not be until Labor finds a way of developing policies around the concept of triple bottom line sustainability that it will differentiate itself from the reactionaries on one side and from the extremist Reds on the other side.]
I wish they’d get on with it!!!
l
blue sky here
Boerwar,
Good Morning!
Did you see the link that I put up last night which you may possibly be interested in reading, about how The Greens national conference have decided to be in thrall to Capitalism in order to get another 1 or 2% PV, hence they have abolished their Inheritance Tax policy? The NSW Red Greens are not happy, Bob! They ARE happy that asylum seekers drowning at sea is keeping the subject in the news and driving new members their way though.
http://watermelontharris.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/greens-and-their-better-selves.html
confessions @ 74
Remember? The insurance companies were almost first after scientists to start planning for the ‘warming’ future. It’s called being hit by reality 😉
The main page of Crikey has been hacked.
If anyone knows how to contact someone who can get it fixed, please do so.
William or someone
Is this true??? Does it matter to Bludgers?
[Stilgherrian @stilgherrian
Folks, don’t go to the @crikey_news website to “have a look”. Google reports that it’s set up with drive-by downloads to infect you in turn.]
[The main page of Crikey has been hacked.
If anyone knows how to contact someone who can get it fixed, please do so.]
Luke Buckmaster might be the person to contact. I will drop him a line but others might like to as well.
Boerwar
Blue sky? Ah yes, I remember that, I think. Sometime back before the first creatures crawled out of the swamp.
Seriously, we have baby creeks running all over our land. Wettest 12 months evah.
BB
[“Once the informant has been revealed as the source there is no point in protecting his or her identity,” he told the court.
He also rejected arguments from Ian Neil, Mr Slipper’s lawyer, that evidence showed the yet-undisclosed document would point only to Mr Ashby.
“… how do I know what is in this document?” Justice Rares said.
Mr Lewis has a week to indicate if the document leads to Mr Ashby’s identity or another source that Mr Lewis agreed to keep confidential.
If it is the latter, the journalist would be protected under the Evidence Amendment (Journalist’s Privilege) Act 2011.
Mr Slipper and the commonwealth are being sued by Mr Ashby, who claims Mr Slipper made unwelcome advances and sent him explicit, sexually suggestive text messages]
The Slipper camp seem to suggest that they know it is only Ashby.
[@crikey_news: Our website appears hacked. Our team are working on a resolution. But for security of your own system steer clear for now.]
This 9 minutes ago from crikey:
[Crikey.com.au @crikey_news
Our website appears to have been hacked. Our team are working on a resolution. But for the security of your own system steer clear for now.]
lizzie:
I do indeed remember.
The Carbon Tax hacks Crikey!. Crikey!
Grey
Comments such as “I always support the leader” are immature, historically ignorant, totalitarian in concept and generally thick witted.
Over time in your life, parties and principles will change. Leaders will change. If you are SO fixated on a particular party then you will not be awake if the party changes, drifts far left or far right, becomes corrupt or incompetent. Each decision MUST be made at a point of time.
Neither the Labor NOR Liberal parties are anything LIKE the parties they were when I joined in 1972 not indeed the parties they were in 1952 or 1912.
The obvious fallacy in you party right or wrong approach is the tired old Hitler analogy, but it is still true in its concept. the original NAZI party was nationalist AND socialist and attracted many wobbly left types. Over time the socialist part rather disappeared. Similarly the original communist parties in Europe had strong democratic and social rights elements. these sort of disappeared too. in both cases this happened BECAUSE people such as yourself sign on to a PARTY not a principle.
I regard comments such as yours as quite dangerous to democratic government.
I suggest you examine you OWN soul and identify 5-10 PRINCIPLES that matter to you. These are what you carry through life. Hopefully the Labor party will always be the best at carrying on these principles and you will never have a conflict. However from time to time you may find that your preferred party no longer supports your principles. Then you have a dilemma.
BUT it is the principles that matter not the party. Otherwise you are simply a warrior following a feudal lord, not an active participant int Democratic governance of the nation.
daretotread
The only problem with your idea about sticking to principles is that a thinking person shifts their ideas over time, as they learn more about life.
If I’d stuck with the same principles all through my life, I would be anti abortion, anti euthanasia, and anti evolution.
I’m not any of those things, because I changed my principles in light of my life experience.
William if u go to turn left 2013 which i mentio ed last week
U will see they had similar and what they did , rather worryi ng
Think i will log off then
Gremlins in the system again….
I posted this in the last thread but don’t seem to have got any responses. I will try again.
CTar1
Thank you for the link. Very interesting.
So, the Greens Party has dropped death taxes in exchange for 1-2% of the vote? Isn’t that like betraying someone for thirty pieces of silver?
Since their policies are uncosted, and since they have no intention of forming a Greens Party Government any time soon, it does not really matter what financial measures they add or subtract. Does it?
I dare say that if something like this had been done by the Labor Party, it would have been yet another example of immoral scum at work.
Meguire Bob @ 9
If you disbelieve opinion polls then you are unfathomably stupid.
They are the only measure we have of what current voting and other intentions are.
Perhaps you prefer to use chicken entrails or some other technique to asses political sentiment?
BW – C@tmomma posted the link on the Greens.
Wow! Nothing between 9.54am and 12.01pm. Is that when Crikey was fixing up the Hack Attack?
Just as well I decided to go off and make a Rhubarb and Apple Pie then. 🙂
CTar1,
How noble of you to point that out. 🙂