GhostWhoVotes tweets that a Galaxy poll on federal voting intention in Queensland gives the Coalition a two-party lead of 57-43 – a seven-point turn-around in Labor’s favour since the last such poll three months ago, suggesting a swing to the Coalition/LNP of only 2% since the 2010 election. Leaving aside the Labor-skewed Morgan face-to-face series, the last time a published poll of federal voting intention showed a swing that low was the Newspoll of May 27-29, 2011, which had the Coalition leading 52-48 nationally. The only Queensland seat Labor would lose on a uniform swing of that size would be Moreton, held by Graham Perrett on a margin of 1.1% (the present numbers in Queensland are 21 seats for the LNP, eight for Labor and one for Bob Katter). The primary votes are 30% for Labor (up seven on the previous poll) and 49% for the Coalition (down seven). The poll also finds 52% detecting little or no impact of the carbon tax on their household budget, against 15% for “major impact” and 27% for “minor impact”. New asylum seeker laws are rated “strong” by 26% of respondents, “inhumane” by 18% and “too little too late” by 51%. The poll was conducted on Wednesday and Thursday from a sample of 800, and has a margin of error of about 3.5%.
UPDATE: The Sunday Mail today has further results from the poll which show “two out of three people believe the Premier is going too far with his proposal to cut 20,000 public sector jobs”, together with figures showing widespared feelings of job insecurity, particularly among government employees.
Further evidence of the Queensland elastic snapping back was provided earlier this week by ReachTEL, which conducted automated phone polls of three seats out of the many which the LNP won from Labor at the state election. These showed Labor leading in two of the seats and lineball in the third. My own calculation of two-party preferred results based on preferences from the previous election had Labor leading 60-40 in Sandgate, a swing to the of 13%, and 51-49 in Brisbane Central, a swing to them of 6%. I had the LNP 51-49 ahead in Towsville, but Possum has it at 51-49 in Labor’s favour – no doubt having used a formula that took better account of the decline of the Katter’s Australian Party vote. The poll also found Campbell Newman’s personal ratings in Sandgate and Townsville in Tony Abbott if not Julia Gillard territory, though he scored better in Brisbane Central. There was similarly a strong view he had not kept his promises in Sandgate and Townville, but an even divide of opinion in Brisbane Central. The samples on each poll were around 400, for margins of error approaching 5%.
And not forgetting …
Seat of the week: Lingiari
I’ve previously been limited my Seat of the Week choices to seats where both parties have preselected candidates, but am making an exception today in a spirit of keeping things topical. The federal seat of Lingiari covers the entirety of the Northern Territory outside of Darwin, which for the most part will play second fiddle during tomorrow night’s election count: whereas Darwin’s suburbs teem with marginal seats, the remainder is largely divided between Country Liberal Party strongholds in Alice Springs and Labor strongholds elsewhere. However, the tea-leaves of the regional and remote results will be read carefully for federal implications given Labor member Warren Snowdon’s narrow margin in Lingiari, and recent rumours of Labor internal polling showing him headed for defeat.
The Northern Territory was first granted its own seat in the federal parliament in 1922, but its member did not attain full voting rights until 1968. Perhaps not coincidentally, the seat had recently fallen to Sam Calder of the Country Party after a long period of Labor control. The Country Liberal Party was established in 1978 as a local alliance between coalition parties to contest elections in the the newly established Northern Territory parliament, and Grant Tambling succeeded Calder as its members upon the latter’s retirement at the 1980 election. Tambling was unseated by Labor’s John Reeves in 1983, and returned as a Senator four years later. The seat thereafter changed hands with some regularity: future Chief Minister Paul Everingham recovered it for the CLP in 1984, Warren Snowdon won it back for Labor in 1987, Nick Dondas held it for the CLP for one term from 1996, and Snowdon recovered it in 1998.
The population of the Northern Territory is such that it consistently hovers between an entitlement of one or two seats according to the formula used to allocate seats to the states and territories. It first rose above the line prior to the 2001 election, resulting in the territory’s division between Solomon, covering Darwin, and Lingiari, which in accommodating the entire remainder of the territory is the second largest electorate in geographical terms after Durack in Western Australia. However, when the Australian Electoral Commission next conducted its mid-term determination of seat entitlements the Northern Territory had fallen 295 residents short of the number required to its second seat. With Labor and the Coalition both convinced they could win both seats at the 2004 election, the parliament proved amenable to arguments that the determination left the territory under-represented, and passed legislation to reinstate the second seat. Solomon and Lingiari accordingly have the lowest enrolments of any seats in Australia at around 62,000, compared with a national average of about 95,000 (which together with the extensive use of mobile booths explains the scarcity of numbers on the 2010 results map at the bottom of the post).
Lingiari is notable for having by far the highest proportion of indigenous persons of any seat in the country, at 41.8% against 15.7% for second-placed Durack. Relatedly, and depressingly, it also has the lowest median age of any electorate. The support of Aboriginal voters has given Labor enough of a base to have kept the seat in their hands, despite CLP strength in pastoral areas and the urban centres of Alice Springs, Katherine and Tennant Creek. Labor’s margins have progressed over four elections from 5.3% to 7.7% to 11.2% to 3.7%. The diversity of the electorate’s components can make for enormously complicated election results, as demonstrated by local swings over the last three elections. In the wake of the Howard government’s intervention into Aboriginal communities before the 2007 election, mobile polling booths swung 8.4% to Warren Snowdon off an already very high base of 78.7%. However, it was a very different story in 2010, when these booths swung to the CLP by no less than 28.1% – a result variously put down to the troubled Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program, the actions of newly merged regional councils, and the ongoing suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act by the new Labor government. Remarkably, the swings in Alice Springs were in the opposite direction, with Snowdon down 2.6% in 2007 and up 8.4% in 2010. In Tennant Creek the Labor vote fell from 58.7% to 34.2% while the Greens rocketed from 4.6% to 33.7%, a result credited to the Muckaty Station nuclear waste dump proposal.
Snowdon is a figure in Labor’s Left faction, and has held junior ministry positions since the Rudd government came to power in 2007. He had earlier been a parliamentary secretary during his first stint as a member from 1990 to 1996, again reaching the position in opposition after the 2001 election. After the 2007 election win he received a substantial promotion to the junior defence science and personnel ministry, which Glenn Milne in The Australian credited to his close association with Julia Gillard. Snowdon was demoted to indigenous health, rural and regional services after Joel Fitzgibbon resigned as Defence Minister in June 2009, which Philip Dorling of the Canberra Times put down to incoming Defence Minister John Faulkner’s “longstanding lack of enthusiasm” for him, “and perhaps more specific concerns about the contribution Mr Snowdon’s office may have made in the past week to Fitzgibbon’s downfall”. He recovered defence science after the 2010 election and further gained veterans affairs, while dropping rural and regional services.
certainly a = certainly are a
re “the cheque”
It looks like it’s a copy of the cheque after it had been negotiated. There is a number stamped at the bottom right which is slightly misaligned and that is probably the transaction number stamped on the cheque during processing. It seems as if the signature(s) have been blanked out, perhaps to prevent the signer(s) taking action against the newspaper.
The processed cheque could have come from bank records or perhaps the “slush fund” asked the bank to send them the cheques back after processing. Someone more familiar with bank processes then I am could inform us here.
Like others, I would have thought such an old cheque would have been destroyed a long time ago, so perhaps it is a modern fabrication (does anyone know more about the logo issue?). If it is a fabrication, that would also explain the absence of signature(s) – you really wouldn’t want to be fitted up with forgery as well as bastardy, would you?
http://andrewelder.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/making-fist-of-it.html
[25 August 2012
Making a fist of it
A senior political correspondent can’t tell when he’s being gamed: ]
Andrew Elder on Peter Hartcher
Bolt is implying that the “Slater and Gordon Trust Account” was only involved with the AWU account that Julia had set up.
AFAIK every law firm has a trust account to hold money for settlements. Surely they don’t keep multiple accounts for all their clients. Book-keeping would deal with that.
[This cheque, drawn on accounts attached to the Australian Workers Union Workplace Reform Association which Julia Gillard helped to register]
This is a Bolt special: damned by tenuous association. Gillard helped the Association get going, so therefore she owns any alleged corrupt wrongdoings.
He uses the same faulty arguments to claim AGW isn’t happening, and that there was never a stolen generation of indigenous children. Incredibly dishonest.
I think we need to take a deep breath re “the cheque”
The cheque transaction into the S & G account was known at the time of the original investigations.
I am sure the police, union and all concerned would have had forensic accountants and others all over the documentation at the time and all explanations noted.
This is not new, the matter has been done and done and done.
The cheque doesn’t even say “Slater and Gordon Trust Account No. x”. I would have thought S&G maybe would have several numbered accounts. They weren’t a small firm even then, were they?
Signed by Gordon Grech
Have to go and do some cooking, but I smell a very dirty rat.
Gillard should actually be quite pleased that the Rudd-Murdoch alliance is resorting to using this kind of fabricated scandal against her, because it’s clearly a sign of weakness, just as the Ozcar allegations were a sign of Turnbull’s weakness.
Assuming it’s genuine, the cheque is FROM the AWU Workplace Reform Association (you can just make this out under the second “money” line) and the money is going to the solicitor’s trust account, from where it would have been paid out to the vendor of the property.
ajm:
I concede failing eyesight, but I can’t see a stamp on that cheque. It looks very much to me as though someone has taken a photocopy of it before it was presented to the bank. Why it would be kept for all this time is bizarre, but someone apparently has.
fess
17 years ago?
I do not think so, especially when signed cheques are not copied because AFAIK they could be presented at the bank and cashed.
That bit of paper is dodgy as.
Are we getting a Heffron thread, William?
Ah, now I see we are getting one.
Urgent message for any Darwin Poll Bludger
[The NT News@TheNTNews
NT VOTES: UNDER AN HOUR LEFT ‘TIL VOTING CLOSES. URGENT CALL OUT FOR MORE HELIUM BALLOONS, KLEENEX AT MILLNER POLL BOOTH]
Doyley
[The cheque transaction into the S & G account was known at the time of the original investigations.]
That would explain how it’s survived – wonder if the police kept it or gave it back to the involved parties? Still intrigued by the logo issue though – it would be delicious if the whole plot could be blown up this easily!
Actually the AWU Workplace Association Inc can use its funds in any way it likes as long as it conforms to the articles of the Association. It was not AWU money. It was the AWUWA money. Two separate entities.
So Bolt can bugger off.
Can legal eagles give an opinion on my 718 please? Am I barking up the wrong tree?
Fess
[I concede failing eyesight, but I can’t see a stamp on that cheque. It looks very much to me as though someone has taken a photocopy of it before it was presented to the bank. Why it would be kept for all this time is bizarre, but someone apparently has.]
Look at the number on the bottom right. It is slightly misaligned and it doesn’t appear to be either the BSB number, the account number or the cheque number. It’s probably been placed there through the machine that processed the cheque
ajm:
Strange things happen. My grandmother died last year, and you should’ve seen the stuff she kept. My grandfather’s tax returns going back decades, ditto electricity bills and rates notices.
Some people are just natural hoarders.
[NSW Labor really deserves a decade or two in opposition. I certainly couldn’t vote for it while Robertson is leader. Fortunately I was able to cast my one vote while I was a NSW resident with a clear conscience, for Steve Whan. I’m glad I don’t live there anymore.]
You were indeed fortunate with Whan. My state Labor incumbent for seat of Wollongong was the insufferable Noreen Hay—-she survived (allegedly with the aid of election material chicanery) by a few hundred votes against a clueless local church pastor (who was shamelessly promoted like gangbusters by our Murdoch-lite Fairfax tabloid, Illawarra Mercury, as “The People’s Padre”). Their farcical campaigns came as close as it gets to a Monty Python spoof of an election.
ajm:
I can kind of see it, but the image is too flawed. Interesting that Bolt doesn’t allow readers to click on the image to enlarge it.
[perhaps the “slush fund” asked the bank to send them the cheques back after processing.]
You certainly could.
(I wonder about the distinctive handwriting on the cheque).
[Philip Coorey now says Gillard also did the conveyancing.
On the larger point, is there anyone on Poll Bludger who doesn’t want a Royal Commission into the AWU??? Fair Work Australia commissioner Ian Cambridge does. Hundreds of thousands of dollars has vanished. Where did it go?]
Oh right, so now we have a Royal Commission based on what f**king POhil Coorey says.
A lot of people have said a lot of things, most of them defamatory, with appropriate apologies proferred.
When we start taking the casual word of hacks as justification for “more questions to answer”, right up to Royal Commission level, then it;s sorry state of affair indeed.
Discrepancies noted in the cheque so far:
1. Not crossed.
2. No signature.
3. No bank stamps.
And let me add:
4. Cheques are usually drawn on the “Commonwealth TRADING Bank”, not “SAVINGS Bank”.
The new “mm” logo was introduced in the early 1990s, after privatization, not in 2001.
Puff
[Actually the AWU Workplace Association Inc can use its funds in any way it likes as long as it conforms to the articles of the Association.]
Incorporated Associations usually can’t distribute assets to their members, so if this was used to buy a house in the name of a union official who belonged to the association, it would clearly have been contrary to the law. The fact that the matter was thoroughly investigated at the time and no legal action was taken seems to indicate that, even if the cheque is genuine, there is probably a relatively “innocent” explanation for it. Given the very precise amount, it may have been the entire balance of an account being sent to the solicitor to be passed on to another body.
[That would explain how it’s survived – wonder if the police kept it or gave it back to the involved parties?]
The police would’ve intercepted it after it had been presented, not before, and hence there would be stamps evident on the cheque. Sorry, but I can’t see the stamp.
[Philip Coorey now says Gillard also did the conveyancing.]
Not new point at all.
You may be correct BB i know the diamond logo came in in early 1990’s the squished mm’s was later I think. I know the guy who designed them, I will visit him tomorrow in Noosa – has has no phone or computer these days.
fess
[Some people are just natural hoarders]
I am! In fact I’m going to go and scrabble around soon to see if I can find a Commonwealth Bank cheque from that era to compare and there’s a reasonable chance there will be something there!
Phil Coorey is setting sail in the wrong boat.
We all know that journalist have been known to mock up documents to add substance to a story, but why does it seem to be News that forgets to add the disclaimer to the picture?
Fess
[The police would’ve intercepted it after it had been presented, not before, and hence there would be stamps evident on the cheque. Sorry, but I can’t see the stamp]
I think you’re looking for a rubber stamp impression – what I’m referring to is the number 0006772230 in bank hieroglyphic format at the bottom right of the cheque. Firms like Slater and Gordon who would have banked cheques in bulk would have had them processed by the bank in bulk, which would have been done by machine which would have stamped transaction numbers like this on the cheques.
Commonwealth Bank website 1996:
http://web.archive.org/web/19961101041444/http://www.commbank.com.au/
Has squished Ms.
[Cheques are usually drawn on the “Commonwealth TRADING Bank”, not “SAVINGS Bank”.]
The ‘association’ by definition was a ‘not for profit’ – so ‘savings’ was probably right.
[You may be correct BB i know the diamond logo came in in early 1990′s the squished mm’s was later I think. I know the guy who designed them, I will visit him tomorrow in Noosa – has has no phone or computer these days.]
I was looking at this PDF file:
which (on page 9) cites the”diamond” logo as having been designed in 1989 by Cato Purnell Partners,and adds:
[The real gem lies in the typographic element of the bank identity. At first glance it looks like a conventional sandwiching of heavy and light weights of the typeface Helvetica. &etc]
The implication was that both were designed together, but I could be wrong, of course. I did a bit more Googling, but this was the only “date” I could find for the logo’s inception.
FAR better to consult the guy who (clearly when drunk) came up with the “double-m” bit.
BK
[Phil Coorey is setting sail in the wrong boat.]
I’d say the Mary Celeste.
Oops PDF file here:
http://characterevent.com/images/img-part5/CH5_Program_download.pdf
All Blacks up by three penalty goals at half-time.
Have any crocs been elected yet?
Looking at this cheque, its from a branch in WA, wasn’t this so called “slush fund” established in Melbourne and weren’t the alleged culprits living in Melbourne at the time ?
Then there is the suspiciously modern looking Comm Bank Logo ?
[The ‘association’ by definition was a ‘not for profit’ – so ‘savings’ was probably right.]
I’ve never seen a cheque drawn on the SAVINGS bank, only the TRADING bank. But you could be completely correct. There are a lot of things I haven’t seen, like humility from the Press Gallery, for example.
This cheque means nothing. It is the cheque from the AWU to S&G. It could only have been signed by an authorised signatory from the association.
It is the cheque from S&G to the solicitor of the original homeowner that would determine whether JG signed it or not.
Mick Collins
[Looking at this cheque, its from a branch in WA, wasn’t this so called “slush fund” established in Melbourne and weren’t the alleged culprits living in Melbourne at the time ?]
It was apparently incorporated in WA for some reason.
BB
[I’ve never seen a cheque drawn on the SAVINGS bank, only the TRADING bank.]
A lot of “not for profits” used to have savings bank cheque accounts. Operated quite a few myself. The bank gave lower fees, etc.
…and thereby confirm her knowledge of the transaction.
SK
[This cheque means nothing. It is the cheque from the AWU to S&G. It could only have been signed by an authorised signatory from the association.
It is the cheque from S&G to the solicitor of the original homeowner that would determine whether JG signed it or not.]
Yep – The point is what other stuff does the source have and can selectively release.
The 802205 on the left of the cheque is similarly misaligned.
Dunno if that means anything.
SK
[It is the cheque from S&G to the solicitor of the original homeowner that would determine whether JG signed it or not.]
And the fact they haven’t published it is a pretty good indication that it never existed!
ajm
thanks,
That makes sense.
However, on my other point, we are talking Association money here, NOT AWU money. There is no reason for anyone in S&L to contact anyone in the AWU as it had nothing to di with the AWU.
Leroy,
Hartcher is certainly making a fist and he has another bit of his person firmly grasped therein. As usual