News to report on the three by-elections presently in view – one federal and two state, two with dates confirmed and one to be announced:
• The Liberal National Party candidate for the Fadden by-election on July 15 will be long-serving Gold Coast councillor Cameron Caldwell, who won a final round vote of 153 preselectors over Dinesh Palipana, with Fran Ward, Owen Caterer and Craig Hobart falling by the wayside in earlier rounds. Lydia Lynch of The Australian reports a meeting of Labor’s administrative committee last Friday unanimously endorsed Letitia Del Fabbro, a nurse educator who was also the candidate at the May 2022 election.
• Nine candidates have nominated for Liberal preselection in Warrandyte, expected to be held in about a fortnight, controversial former Kew MP Tim Smith not being among them. As reported by Rachel Baxendale in The Australian, they are John Roskam, former executive director of the Institute of Public Affairs; Sarah Overton, KPMG director; Nicole Ta-Ei Werner, who ran in Box Hill at the November state election; Jason McClintock, a tech business founder who ran in Eltham (and who donated heavily to the party’s state election campaign); David Farrelly, who ran in Pakenham; Jemma Townson, “energy industry communications director and former Matthew Guy and Katie Allen staffer”; Antonietta di Cosmo, 22-year-old “Ryan Smith staffer, champion rower and law student”; Allison Troth, “cancer campaigner and former John Howard staffer”; and Andrew Conlon, “Manningham councillor and maths teacher”. The report says factional conservatives are likely to back Roskam or Werner, while “an opposing factional grouping that coalesces around powerbrokers Frank Greenstein and Holly Byrne” might support Overton, McClintock or Townson.
• The Rockingham by-election to replace Mark McGowan has been set for July 29. The West Australian reports that Labor’s candidate will likely be Magenta Marshall, who has won backing from the Right, despite last week saying she was “not sure it’s my time”. Marshall is in her late twenties and works in a “specialised campaigning role” in party headquarters, having previously been an electorate officer to Balcatta MP David Michael.
Pueo:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 9:09 pm
[‘You might consider installing the, uh, “Carlton Cole Plugin” to filter out certain posts.’]
Thanks. I refuse to ask my dear great-niece to assist me, not that she’ll partake of my estate? I’ve found that the digital era is tantamount to comparing inches to the metric equivalent . Pepys.
So I have two (kinda actually three) best live shows that I’ve seen. Above & Beyond at Alexandra Palace for Group Therapy 050 (2013). Andrew Rayel and Armin van Buuren at ASOT650 Miami (2014). Andrew Rayel’s show is still the best live set I have ever been to.
US ABC News:
Pluralities of Americans support second Trump indictment, say charges are politically motivated: POLL
There are sharp partisan differences, according to the survey
A plurality of Americans think that former President Donald Trump should have been indicted by a federal grand jury on charges related to his handling of classified documents, yet a near equal number say the charges are politically motivated, according to a new ABC News/Ipsos poll.
Trump willfully retained documents containing the nation’s most sensitive intelligence after he left office, exhibited some of them on at least two occasions and then tried to obstruct the investigation into their whereabouts, prosecutors allege in the indictment. Trump has repeatedly denied any allegations of wrongdoing.
Nearly half — 48% — of Americans think Trump should have been charged in this case, whereas 35% think he should not have been and 17% saying they do not know, per the ABC News/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pluralities-americans-support-trump-indictment-charges-politically-motivated/story?id=99984672
Katy Gallagher in a fair amount of trouble after tonight’s revelations. Who would be next in line to be Finance Minister?
William Bowe @ Monday, June 12, 2023 at 9:31 pm:
“EA, what Mavis is triggered by is you posting eight comments in barely five minutes that bear no relation to the topic of the site you’re on. Perhaps you should find a more appropriate forum.”
================
William, okay, thank you. That is a clear boundary. I did wonder whether I should put all Timothy Snyder’s points, which journalists here in Australia such as those on tonight’s ABC 7:30 program so clearly need a primer on, in one long post or broken up like I did. Now I know. Thank you.
BTW – when you say that a string of posts about how journalists here in Australia should report on major international events is not on topic, does that also apply to discussions on how British Labour treats one of its former leaders? Or to discussions on how the US justice system deals with crimes by former Presidents? I must say, I cannot see how those sorts of topics are any more about ‘Australian elections’ than mine. So, if the issue is not the nexus between the topics of my posts and that of this site, but rather their frequency, then I take the point and will reduce accordingly. Or to nothing at all, if you pull the plug, as is your right on your own site.
It still seems disturbing to me, though, that it is only posts about Russia’s crimes against Ukraine, and on Ukraine’s stout-hearted resistance to them, out of all the international (and hence, ‘non-Australian-election’) discussions on this blog, that gets targeted by the likes of Mavis in this existential way.
Above & Beyond have really perfected that integration of light/video performance and music, haven’t they JJ? I’ve seen them four times now, and they’ve just gotten better and better.
That Alexandra Palace one must have been a cracker. I listened to the Bayer set waaay too many times. I think that was the one.
Evan – would have to be someone in the Senate on the Left. Most likely Tim Ayres with a female left winger taking Ayres junior spot.
Agree completely on Above & Beyond re video, lights and sound. Their event engineers are among the best in the business. The Alexandra Palace show was definitely a highlight for me. It was the Andrew Bayer set. An amazing set in a great venue. I was really fortunate to see that.
Pi @ #1172 Monday, June 12th, 2023 – 8:23 pm
This is genuinely deluded. Calling Dutton racist and reminding people of him walking out of the apology is fine. Linking anyone worrying about a constitutional amendment (something Australians historically almost always worry about) is just going to annoy people, particularly in such a stubborn country.
Regarding the opposition to the Voice, I think the answer has something to do not so much “Cui bono?” but “Quis perdet?” – i.e. Who loses? if Indigenous Australians have a stronger voice in national affairs, who is disadvantaged or at least worries that they might be disadvantaged?
I’d say it’s the miners, frackers, agribusiness,
water thievesirrigators and maybe some developers. They don’t want to give a voice to people who don’t share their interests and values (mainly their ongoing profitability). They’re among the biggest backers and bankrollers of the political Right.Who thinks they might be disadvantaged.
1. People whose interests (their jobs, the prosperity of their region) actually are closely aligned with the interests of those mentioned above. That’s actually a small number. More “No” voters are needed.
2. Those who can be convinced that their interests do. A much bigger number.
3. People who think it won’t help or is being done the wrong way (e.g. Ms Thorpe). Already on board.
4. The confused. If they don’t know vote no.
5. The disengaged and indifferent.
6. Racists, who don’t want anything that improves the position of people they look down on. About 10-15% of the population.
The “No” campaign seeks to increase the numbers of 2 and 4, move people from 5 to 4 and dogwhistle to 6.
Mavis, actually, I think I know what upset you. I apologise for, and fully retract, my ageist slur against Silvio Berlusconi. It was out of order.
Most Miners have invested heavily in reconciliation action plans steve777.
It seems unlikely they would be invested in defeating the Voice.
The Yes vote wins if the question is as uncomplicated as possible and it won’t frighten the proverbial horses.
The No case is winning because frankly the Yes campaign up to now has been a shambles – no overriding consistent message, other than a load of virtue signalling .
And here’s me thinking that not being a racist is a virtue. That’s the problem; the racists know exactly why they’re opposed to be voice. That’s why they didn’t even need to wait for the wording to oppose it.
“frighten”
If you’re scared of offending racists, that’s on you.
”no overriding consistent message, other than a load of virtue signalling”
Preaching to the converted.
Steve777, this is a complete miss read of the No vote.
The problem with The Voice proposal is that it has come pre-packaged with an internal contradiction.
A referendum is basically an expression of the democratic principle that one person should get one vote.
The proponents of the voice would like to shift the dial on this to create a new principle that goes something like- one person, one vote, plus a little bit extra if you are an aborigine.
So we are being asked to cast a vote on a proposal that would forever alter the basis for voting. Some of us don’t like that idea
Which one of the six groups in your analysis does that fit into? As far as I can see, none of them.
Steve777
You have summed it up.
My own view, “what is the problem with giving first nation people a voice”. I am going to vote yes, and I wish the bullshit would stop.
You have the Green political party against it, the Liberals officialdom against it, the likes of Linda Thorp against it. Pity, but I don’t think it is going to get up, another referendum thrown onto the scrap heap of history.
Unfortunately there is no argument that is going to save it. The Green political party, Liberals officialdom and Linda Thorp are going to have to live with their success.
Mr Squiggle
Bullshit.
It is an advisory body, it just might solve the problem. Which group do you belong? Mean spirited!
Lars Von Trier says:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 10:00 pm
Most Miners have invested heavily in reconciliation action plans steve777.
It seems unlikely they would be invested in defeating the Voice.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/26/rio-tinto-blasts-46000-year-old-aboriginal-site-to-expand-iron-ore-mine
MrSquiggle: “internal contradiction. ”
Is that the new talking point to handwave away racism as reverse racism, is it?
The “internal contradiction” is thinking our constitution doesn’t need changing, because it has been broken by our own departure from the rule of law. But to the racists it’s “we took it. it’s ours now”.
The IPA, the Voice of Gina and other Big Business interests in Australia.
” 1. The Voice will become a vehicle for allocating critical social and economic resources such as health, education, and job opportunities on the basis of race not need;
2. The Voice will not be merely advisory but will wield a veto over important parliamentary debate and government decisions;
3 The Voice will be impossible to repeal, defund or effectively reform if it proves ineffective or is acting contrary to what was intended.”
https://ipa.org.au/ipa-today/the-voice-to-parliament-an-analysis-of-the-new-zealand-experience-and-australias-history-of-judicial-activism
The miners might have beautiful reconciliation plans, just as some police stares are adorned by fine bills of rights.
Mr Squiggle
The proponents of the voice would like to shift the dial on this to create a new principle that goes something like- one person, one vote, plus a little bit extra if you are an aborigine.
___________________________________
This is an outright lie and needs to be called out as such. Nothing in the voice proposal gives anything more in the way of decision-making power than any other Australian has – and in the case of professional lobbyists who represent anyone with the money to pay them – still a lot less!
All that the proposal offers is a means to help government expenditure and decision-making on indigenous programs become more effective and less reliant on single voices that tell the government of the day what they want to hear.
I’m sick of the lies.
There certainly is a core of racists who oppose the voice, but – much worse – there is a core of single-minded political opportunists who oppose the Voice purely because they think they will score a political hit on Anthony Albanese and Labor. They won’t, but they will fuck up the ongoing lives of First Nations people in Australia. Not that the Mr Squiggles of this country give a shit as long as they are ok.
Enough Already:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 9:45 pm
You really don’t get it do you? If I were you, I’d defer to a higher power. In my view you’re on the precipice. Pepsy.
Frednk-I am a supporter of democracy and I thought perhaps I might find some fellow travellers on this site, what d’you think?
‘The Voice’ is different from “a referendum to amend the constitution to enshrine the voice’.
The undemocratic nature of the proposed referendum is one of the top three reasons for voting no, according to the Roy Morgan poll, which this site linked to a while back
Mr Squiggle ”Which one of the six groups in your analysis does that fit into? As far as I can see, none of them.”
The groups are not necessarily distinct or sharply defined. You’re probably closest to (3).
Bonnie: “worrying”
No one on the no side is worrying about anything except being publicly called out for their racism. You’ll learn this qucksmart when you realize how few people, beyond the overt racists like Dutton, that will say no publicly. Dutton is hoping to capitalise on the hidden racist cohort. Just like Abbott tried to capitalise on the hidden homophobe cohort in the same sex marriage plebiscite. This is who they are.
Pi, you are going hard on the concept that there are racists and non-racists. Current thinking is that we all have some degree of implicit bias. Have a go yourself if you like:
https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/user/demo.australia/au.static/selectatest.html
Reality isn’t quite all black and all white 😉
Steve777 – Granted Rinehart is a category of her own. But seriously the miners are interested in making cash and lots of it, and have been negotiating native title now for over 2 decades. I think they’ve also made the judgement that given their impact on the environment, poor relations with the indigenous population is not in their interests.
Its hard to believe they would be anti-Voice
nath says:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 9:24 pm
I think Albo will keep standing by Gallagher. I think she misled Parliament but it’s probably not so clear cut for the public to be agitated about. She made a poor decision to get involved in this in the first place.
…………………………………
KG did not mislead Parliament.
When she replied to Reynolds in Parliament words to the effect she knew nothing, what was the context?
The context was the thus far unevidenced slur by Reynolds that she had been informed by a labor senator (no doubt the tragically deceased kk) that the rape allegations were known about for two weeks and were being weaponised.
Central to the context was that it was known about by labor senator(s) for 2 weeks and was being sat on for 2 weeks for political gain.
KG rejected that slur. That she knew of at least some of the allegations for a few days prior to things going public is confirmed. But that prior knowledge was in the situation where she knew Higgins was about to go public. What deep political machinations it is hinted kg engaged in over 3 days is of course never made explicit.
TPOF- we are being asked to vote on an effective voice, not an ineffective voice.
If The Voice has no power to influence government, why support it? Is it just another symbol?
The whole purpose of the voice is to give indigenous australians a power they do not currently have. If you don’t think it will do that perhaps you could consider voting No?
Can I add a seventh group related to point 3 of IPA’s argument:
7. Those who have seen and remember that the last two attempts at a voice ended in a shambles requiring governments to close them down*. They wish to have a voice but not have it enshrined and inviolate in the constitution
*Edit: NAC was abolished by Hawke with coalition support, ATSIC was abolished by Howard with Labor support
Geoff Clark, the last atsic chief is a signatory to the Uluṟu statement.
MrSquiggle: “If The Voice has no power to influence government, why support it?”
Because they asked for it. Objectively. Because they want to be heard. That’s what the Uluru Statement is. The voice is enacting the Uluru Statement. It is YOU who is telling them to get fucked.
Griff: “Reality isn’t quite all black and all white”
Mostly is though when talking about racism.
Mr squiggle:
A referendum is basically an expression of the democratic principle that one person should get one vote.“
………………..
Apart from all the other nonsense in your post, as you should know a referendum is no such thing. A Tasmanian voter has a much greater vote when counted as such than a Victorian, and Northern Territory/ACT citizens get no “statehood” vote at all.
The good vibes element of it only goes so far. There is a fairly large section of society that do not share the worldview that historical wrongs need to be righted. You can call that attitude racist but that is not going to help win the argument.
For a change to pass it needs to be shown to bring tangible net benefits to both the indigenous and non-indigenous community – I actually believe there are some around streamlining processes and consultation but they probably too hard to sell a campaign on.
Comparing the vote on the voice to the same sex marriage vote is a false comparison. That was shown to have worked overseas in a multitude of countries and involved individual rights, so it was a lot easier to sell. The lack of details around the Voice make it hard to compare to overseas examples.
Pi says:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 10:40 pm
MrSquiggle: “If The Voice has no power to influence government, why support it?”
Because they asked for it. Objectively. Because they want to be heard. That’s what the Uluru Statement is. It is YOU who is telling them to get fucked.
Griff: “Reality isn’t quite all black and all white”
Mostly is though when talking about racism.
______________
You obviously didn’t do the test.
Some reading if that helps you understand: https://www.vox.com/2014/12/26/7443979/racism-implicit-racial-bias
Please try.
Mr Squiggle @ #1216 Monday, June 12th, 2023 – 10:07 pm
Where were you people when it was determined that lobbyists are all fine and good? Having money and connections gets you way more votes (as in “influence”) than having indigenous heritage ever will, Voice or no Voice.
Maybe fix that before getting all riled up over the Voice? The playing field has never been equal. At least the Voice makes it a bit more fair.
Lars
I wondered what had happened to him. Who does he represent now and have the latest misappropriation charges been dealt with?
BSF: “Comparing the vote on the voice to the same sex marriage vote is a false comparison.”
It is exactly the same people doing exactly the same thing by appealing to exactly the same cohort.
Personally I think it’s going to have exactly the same outcome for exactly the same reason. And look what happened to Abbott.
Griff: “Please try.”
nah. I don’t need website algorithms to validate my opinion.
Windhover ( i love that poem, by the way)
You highlight one aspect of the double majority neededfor success….ok, I’ll highlight the other
all australian voters get one vote, even those in the territories. And there needs to be a majority for the voice to get up
Dont know oc.
Pi says:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 10:47 pm
BSF: “Comparing the vote on the voice to the same sex marriage vote is a false comparison.”
It is exactly the same people doing exactly the same thing by appealing to exactly the same cohort.
Personally I think it’s going to have exactly the same outcome for exactly the same reason. And look what happened to Abbott.
Griff: “Please try.”
nah. I don’t need website algorithms to validate my opinion.
___________________
Understood. Not willing to question yourself. Unfortunately there are some with different values that also have rigid thinking. And that is why the referendum will fail.
Griff: “Not willing to question yourself. ”
If you have a question you need to ask, ask it.
Griff: “that is why the referendum will fail.”
If it fails, it will be because too many people don’t know how to think critically, and have never learned how to form their own valid opinions. They prefer websites to do the thinking for them.
MrSquiggle: “all australian voters get one vote, even those in the territories. And there needs to be a majority for the voice to get up”
There needs to be 50% or more in four states AS WELL as the 50% across the whole. So no, the territories don’t get the same vote. Which kinda shows you how much you actually know about this subject, and how much it really does seem like you’re just reading the talking points of another person.
ATSIC was dissolved when it had effectively died. There was internally too much infighting at the very end and some of the behaviour was petty and almost childish. It was undefendable and need to be replaced by a new body – however that new body never happened.
An example of how messed up it had got was I was doing some work a few years afterwards in Canberra which required accessing the resource library that was left over from ATSIC on a mildly controversial topic. The references I needed had been deliberately destroyed in that collection by someone – presumably because it did not help there case on the same topic – but there were copies elsewhere (I went to the copyright deposit versions in the SA state library….. they were dusty).
a r – ‘ where were you people when it was determined that lobbyists are all fine and good’?
Rightio, so there aren’t any indigenous lobbyists?
I don’t recall any referendum on lobbyists, and i don’t recall getting a vote on lobbyists, but I would certainly support reform in that area.
Obviously, the growth lobby have captured albanese and co. Otherwise, why bring in 400,000 migrants in the middle of a housing crisis?
ATSIC was destroyed by a campaign by Newscorp which was relentless, Coalition hostility and Labor apathy.
Pathetic justifications for Labor’s complicity with the Liberals are ubiquitous.
B.S. Fairman @ #1235 Monday, June 12th, 2023 – 10:15 pm
The Marriage Survey’s question was straightforward. We knew what was being asked and what the effect would be. There wasn’t any legal or bureaucratic jargon to confuse or cause concern. It was straightfoward: Do you want same sex couples to be allowed to marry or not? And of course, as you also pointed out, it had clear successful precedent that we were aware of through popular culture.
The other reason you can’t compare the two is that the survey was not compulsory. Many who genuinely did not care or refused to follow the issue didn’t bother voting at all. The apathetic or uninformed, assuming they’re enrolled to vote, do have to vote in this referendum. Usually that cohort, when forced to make a choice, will lean towards the negative (yeah some will leave their ballot blank and there will be a few who decide to throw caution into the wind and vote yes but most will lean No.)
Wat: “he other reason you can’t compare the two is that the survey was not compulsory.”
The ONLY reason why it was not compulsory was because the LNP thought it could depend upon the hidden homphobes voting in numbers. The religious whackos aka their base. If they had thought there was a better chance of defeating it by making it compulsory, they would have made it compulsory. Isn’t it funny all of a sudden how the conservatives don’t want to be reminded of the last time they relied upon bigotry to further a culture war? Yes yes… this bigotry is different than that bigotry because reasons.
Pi says:
Monday, June 12, 2023 at 11:00 pm
Griff: “Not willing to question yourself. ”
If you have a question you need to ask, ask it.
Griff: “that is why the referendum will fail.”
If it fails, it will be because too many people don’t know how to think critically, and form their own opinions. They prefer websites to do the work for them.
_______________
Implicit bias is not about thinking critically. I shall leave it there, as you do not wish to self-examine your opinions. Intelligent people develop large and complex learning schema to allow for extensive System 1 thinking. But every now and then, System 2 may be required 😉
The same sex marriage fake plebiscite got up because Big Money didn’t care about the issue, so bigots and Christians Obsessed with Sex were left to carry the fight for “No” on their own. Their attempts to woo enough “don’t care” voters didn’t work.