Richard Mulcahy hoping to have a party

Skidbladnir said :

Dead and in an unmarked grave.
Probably not a good example, Thumper.

So were did you dig up that information from.

Further to the above comment (which may still be in moderation at the time anyone reads this), and while on the topic of ACT Elections materials…

There’s something else everyone posting political material to RiotACT, posting on RiotACT re: political posts, or acting as moderator should probably read.

ACT Electoral Commision – Authorising and providing electoral material
There are fines payable and potential for imprisonment if disclosure requirements are not met.

(election08, I am thinking of you on this one)

The Electoral Amendment Legistlation Act (see this link)

The relevant bit is the provisions for:
Removing the provision for non-party groups to be listed on ballot papers; and

Meaning that the independents (non-party candidates) would all be grouped together on the one side of the form, instead of under a heading.
While it may not seem like much, its an issue for people who either a) really don’t care much about their vote, or b) just want to see a particular party in\out, and just fill in every box in a particular column with their numbers.
So even if you have only one candidate, calling yourself the the Free Range Rovers, the Communist Retrograde Action Party, or the Dickhead Mulcahy Canberra Party means you get your own column on the form, instead of being grouped in with the other unwashed independents.

It also has a provision for reducing all the thresholds for disclosure of political donations and expenditure to $1000 from 1 July 2008, to bring the ACT disclosure scheme into line with proposed changes to the Commonwealth disclosure scheme.

While I am no expert, I have heard on the grapevine that there have been changes to the ACT Electoral Act which makes it extremely difficult to be an Independent in Canberra now. Something about where you are placed on the ballot paper.

It seems everyone who would really rather be an Independent – the CAP (a conglomerate of Independents), Pangallo, Mulcahy have all realised this. Does anyone know the details?

Mulcahy only got elected because he was on a Libs ticket. He would need a quota on his own(12,000 votes) and he wont get one.

Mulcahy had enough support to be elected the last time round so it doesnt surprise me that he managed to find enough supporters from that group of individuals (and/or disgruntled liberals) to support the registration of a party. I think it will be interesting to see who signs on as co-candidates in his party.

I just heard Stanhope on the news saying what a fine political animal was Mulcahy. This is ambiguous – does he think he’ll get in and be easier for an ALP minority government to deal with than the C(R)AP? Does he really think Mulcahy is worthwhile? Is he trying to aggravate/disrupt the Libs by getting Mulcahy into the progressive tent? Given Stanhope’s questionable popularity, is he trying to give Mulcahy such a big hug that Mulcahy gets poisoned bit it?

This coule be hilarious if Mulcahy (cut spending etc) shares the crossbench with someone from the C(R)AP (a pack of miscellaneous mendicants, probably, but they’re still rather light on for policies).

How does the legal concept of signing up for a party (and paying fees?) fit with the fact that the Party doesn’t exist until after it gets accepted by the AEC, which doesn’t happen until people join up…

…and who is Richard Mulcahy? The name rings a bell, but I am too apathetic about ACT “politics” to google him.

hahahaha… I’m going home with a smile on my face. Thanks Mr Evil.

Skidbladnir said :

I hope its not an indicator of his policies, but his website is shit, and devoid of content.

Much like the man himself then.