The week that was

Party turmoil in Victoria and Queensland, state and territory seat entitlements for the next federal parliament determined, and more polling on attitudes to demonstrations in the United States.

After a particularly eventful week, a whole bunch of electorally relevant news to report:

• The last official population updates have confirmed next month’s official determination of how many seats each state and territory will be entitled to in the next parliament will cause the abolition of seats in Western Australia and the Northern Territory, and the creation of a new one in Victoria for the second consecutive term. Antony Green offers detailed consideration of how the redistributions might look, suggesting Victoria’s will most likely result in the creation of another safe Labor seat in Melbourne’s outer north-west, while Western Australia’s could either mash together Hasluck and Burt in eastern Perth, or abolish the safe Liberal south-of-the-river seat of Tangney, with knock-on effects that would weaken Labor’s position in Fremantle and/or Burt.

• In the wake of the 60 Minutes/The Age expose on Adem Somyurek’s branch stacking activities on Sunday, Labor’s national executive has taken control of all the Victorian branch’s federal and state preselections for the next three years. Steve Bracks and Jenny Macklin have been brought in to serve as administrators until January, and an audit of the branch’s 16,000 members will be conducted to ensure that are genuine consenting members and paid their own fees.

• Ipsos has published polling on the recent demonstrations in the United States from fifteen countries, which found Australians to be supportive of what were specified as “peaceful protests in the US” and disapproving of Donald Trump’s handling of them, although perhaps in slightly lesser degree than other more liberal democracies. Two outliers were India and Russia, which produced some seemingly anomalous results: the former had a strangely high rating for Trump and the latter relatively low support for the protests, yet both were uniquely favourable towards the notion that “more violent protests are an appropriate response”.

• The Tasmanian government has announced the periodical Legislative Council elections for the seats of Huon and Rosevears will be held on August 1, having been delayed from their normally allotted time of the first Tuesday in May.

In Queensland, where the next election is a little over four months away:

• After floating the possibility of an election conducted entirely by post, the Queensland government announced this week that the October 31 state election will be conducted in a more-or-less normal fashion. However, pre-poll voting is being all but actively encouraged, to the extent that Attorney-General Yvette D’Ath says there will be an “election period” rather than an election day. This will mean “more pre-poll locations, longer pre-poll hours, and more pre-poll voting days in the two weeks prior to the election”.

• The Liberal National Party opposition was thrown into turmoil last week after the Courier-Mail ($) received internal polling showing Labor leading 51-49 in Redlands, 52-48 in Gaven, 55-45 in Mansfield and 58-42 in inner urban Mount Ommaney. The parties were tied in the Sunshine Coast hinterland seat of Glass House, while the LNP led by 52-48 in the Gold Coast seat of Currumbin, which it recently retained by a similar margin at a by-election. Frecklington’s supporters pointed the finger at the state branch president, Dave Hutchinson, who was reportedly told by Frecklington that his position was untenable after Clive Palmer hired him as a property consultant in January. The party room unanimously affirmed its support for Frecklington on Monday, as mooted rival David Crisafulli ruled out a challenge ahead of the election.

• The Queensland parliament this week passed an array of electoral law changes including campaign spending caps of $92,000 per candidate and limitations on signage at polling places. The changes have been criticised ($) by the Liberal National Party and Katter’s Australian Party, who complain that union advertising will now dominate at polling booths, and that the laws was pushed through with indecent haste on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

1,922 comments on “The week that was”

  1. C@tmomma @ #1902 Monday, June 22nd, 2020 – 7:52 pm

    Confessions @ #1885 Monday, June 22nd, 2020 – 9:20 pm

    C@t:

    I think it was Reed Galen or George Conway who said a few weeks ago that they hadn’t really gotten started yet.

    I’m listening to this pod atm (you’ve probably already heard it), and it’s horrifying. Lucy Caldwell makes a great case for Trump getting re-elected in November!

    https://podcast.thebulwark.com/lucy-caldwell-on-unwell-republicans

    Yes I listened to that the other day. I wonder when Trump is gone how many of the coward Republicans will just pretend they never supported or sucked up to him.


  2. Pegasus says:
    Monday, June 22, 2020 at 5:48 pm

    Yes Frednk

    The interview with Adam Bandt is a rebuttal to Turnbull’s interview. No doubt with your open mind you will listen to the latter’s spin and accept it but wont bother listening to Bandt.

    Half way through
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGKOILewsiM
    It is quite fascinating. Got to the bit where Turnbull points out the damage done by the greens. I think I have made my views know, so it will come as no surprise I agree with Turnbull.
    I will be listening to No 14 for the excuses.
    Let me guess:
    1)Not good enough.
    2)A whinge, Turnbull didn’t negotiate with the greens.
    I will be pleasantly surprised if he owns up to the damage the greens have done.

  3. frednk says:
    Monday, June 22, 2020 at 10:35 pm

    Pegasus says:
    Monday, June 22, 2020 at 5:48 pm

    Yes Frednk

    The interview with Adam Bandt is a rebuttal to Turnbull’s interview. …… so it will come as no surprise I agree with Turnbull.
    ________________
    So you’ve finally revealed your true Liberal colours? About time I say.

  4. Dotard back to all caps in a deranged tweet storm.. along with citing Breitbart and shitcanning John Bolton – the leader of the free world.

  5. My personal assessement of Premier Gladys as being both callous and evil has received reinforcement by this evening’s 4 Corners investigation into how covid19 infection was handled in Anglicare Newmarch house.
    When covid19 hit the Baptist Care home in Macquarie Park all sick residents were taken to hospital. But the NSW state gov’t refused to allow covid19 suffering residents to be taken to hospital from Newmarch house.
    Instead, the sick and the well were confined to quarters. Their children were denied access, and forbidden from taking them out by a state order. Requests to be taken to hospital refused.
    Staff had no infection control skills.

    Minister for Health, Brad Hazzard refused to be interviewed, as did everyone in authority involved.

    This appears to be the new policy – confine people in aged care homes if there is an outbreak of covid19 until it has finished infecting.

    If you have a parent in an aged care home you should hope covid19 does not get in, because your parent will be kept isolated, given limited care and assistance, and may well die a lonely death from pneumonia.

    A truly evil and callous policy from our LNP government.
    Watch and be horrified.

    https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/

  6. Dicey Haybale, QC, JP says:
    Monday, June 22, 2020 at 9:43 pm
    So why did Keiffel still refer to Heydon as “the Honourable”?

    It defies belief.
    ……………………….
    Um, the investigation finding is not a finding of a court of law. As CJ of the high court Kiefel was compelled to accept the finding of Thom in respect of the investigation she instigated. That finding is itself contestable and has no Legal status such as a criminal or civil finding in a court of law.

    Heydons dissent in the Malaysia solution case was orthodox. French CJ had to effectively over-rule a previous decision of his in the federal court. The majority decision was a significant legal surprise. I don’t suggest any misfeasance by any of the judges in that case.

    Heydons error in accepting the Liberal party speakers invitation was a serious misjudgment but there is no reason to believe he was wrong to refuse to recuse himself. No one appealed his decision, probably correctly.

    Accepting the dirty role as RC of a grubby political witch-hunt Demonstrated heydon had no moral or political acumen. His findings, most utterly forgettable and regrettable, particularly in relation to Julia Gillard, who was criticised for being too well prepared, stain him forever.

    The sex discrimination act enables victims (such as those who accuse heydon) to sue for compensation. There could also Possibly be common law claims.

  7. Sprocket @ 10:52.

    It is extraordinary not say to disturbing that the President of the USA is letting forth such a brainlessly incoherent stream of invective. Surely no one could be taking this guy seriously.

  8. While it’s true that the investigation into Heydon has no legal weight, it is more persuasive than your run-of-the-mill scandal sheet beat-up.

    As “the employer” the High Court has employed an apparently competent, skilled and experienced investigator. Evidence is in the form of present day recollections that are well and cross corroborated – thus establishing a pattern of alleged transgressions – as well as, in some cases, contemporaneous diary notes and diarised verbal complaints to senior legal academics.

    The High Court has also issued an apology to the “victims”, as has Heydon (actually more an expression of regret that his actions were misunderstood).

    If nothing else, this ought to put to rest the accusation that the High Court reflexively protects rich, powerful Catholics.

    Next step should probably see some kind of report to the police, and possibly initiation of civil action. If what these women are saying is true, then you could argue they have a duty to complete the process.

    We’ll done Josh Bornstein for guiding them through it.

  9. I’ve just read the SMH article on Heydon.

    The number of allegations, their contemporary documentation, the assertion that this alleged behaviour on his part was common knowledge amongst his peers, and the period of time over which it was allegedly allowed to happen, gives an aura of credibility to an otherwise unbelievable scenario.

    I am distressed and saddened for the young women concerned.

    I am furious and unbelieving that reports of this type of ongoing conduct, if true, were not known to the legal officials and the Government when he was appointed to the bench and when he was appointed to run the Kangaroo Court Royal Commission.

    Finally I am sickened and beyond disgusted that the media of this country, knowing of the allegations, did not follow them up at the time of his appointment to conduct an inquiry patently designed solely to advance the base political motives of the Liberal Party to the detriment of our democracy.

    A pox on all their houses.

  10. Boris Johnson and Theresa May ignored claims the Kremlin had a “likely hold” over Donald Trump and may have covertly funded Brexit, the former spy Christopher Steele alleges in secret evidence given to MPs who drew up the Russia report.
    https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/22/boris-johnson-theres-may-ignored-claims-russia-had-likely-hold-over-donald-trump-ex-spy-christopher-steele-claims?utm_term=Autofeed&CMP=twt_b-gdnnews&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&__twitter_impression=true

  11. The media is still quiet on that it was the foreign media controlled and owned Liberal/national party , who had links with Heydon and Abbott appointed Heydon as the commissioner for the royal commission into unions

  12. “Um, the investigation finding is not a finding of a court of law.”

    So? Why is he still Honourable? Some bull dust legalease reason I guess. My question has nothing to do with a finding of criminality. If you want to defend his honour, go ahead. But I find it incredibly distasteful that with this finding he is still called Honourable.

    Lawyers need to get out more.

    Oh, and the condescending “um” at the start of your post identifies you as a Wally.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *