Advertisement

Simon Sheikh planning a doomed run at Gazza

By 23 October 2012 41

The ABC has the risible news that the former GetUp! frontman Simon Sheikh wants to run Green for an ACT Senate Seat.

He thinks Liberal Senator Gary Humphries’ seat is vulnerable.

I really don’t see Gary’s core constituency flocking to Simon Sheikh.

UPDATE 23/10/12 09:32: The Liberals’ Eric Abetz is taking this as a gotcha moment:

“Simon Sheik’s tilt for Greens preselection for the ACT Senate again puts the lie to GetUp’s claims to be independent.”

“Moreover, while the Liberal Party has never taken public support for granted, the Greens’ constant inflation of their chances of gaining an ACT Senator is particularly hard to swallow given the collapse in their vote on Saturday,” Liberal Senate Leader, Eric Abetz said today.

Senator Abetz described GetUp! as a partisan left wing union front which uses people’s concern about issues to funnel their vote towards Labor and the Greens.

“At the 2010 federal election GetUp mustered a massive, deceptive campaign in the ACT for the benefit of the Greens, to unseat Gary Humphries, but to no avail.”

“GetUp’s ‘scorecard’ gave the Greens ‘the tick’ on every issue and in the ACT a Greens boothworker was photographed blatantly putting up GetUp! material.”

“Simon Sheik’s bid for Greens pre-selection simply ‘bells the cat’ and it will be fascinating, should he see off Lin Hatfield Dodds or any other contender, to see GetUp! explain supporting Sheik while simultaneously claiming to be ‘independent’.”

Please login to post your comments
41 Responses to Simon Sheikh planning a doomed run at Gazza
#1
neanderthalsis11:47 am, 23 Oct 12

It will serve to do little more than split the leftist/labor vote. Those punters backing Gazza will keep on backing him (probably) and preferences from a greens/getup candidate will flow back to Labor. So end result will be Lundy and Humphries.

#2
Tetranitrate12:13 pm, 23 Oct 12

Not this garbage again. If Kerrie tucker couldn’t do it in 2007 it’s not going to happen.

#3
SnapperJack12:38 pm, 23 Oct 12

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

#4
LSWCHP1:02 pm, 23 Oct 12

I heard this clown being interviewed on ABC news radio this morning. He sounded like he’d spent the last decade in the Political Spin Doctor School of Smooth Rhetoric. All that I remember is a flood of enthusiastic and insincere bloviation about ensuring positive outcomes going forward etc etc…

#5
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd1:07 pm, 23 Oct 12

SnapperJack said :

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

Really not very bright are you, snapper jack.

#6
460cixy1:25 pm, 23 Oct 12

SnapperJack said :

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

So very true

#7
Diggety1:35 pm, 23 Oct 12

Well, I don’t think Abetz needed to point that out, but he’s dead right.

#8
poetix1:51 pm, 23 Oct 12

Gazza Strait?

Hardly, after Saturday.

#9
Skidbladnir1:55 pm, 23 Oct 12

SnapperJack said :

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

1) Way to go on the Godwin’s Law there, buddy.

2) The AEC’s position on GetUp in 2005
[GetUp] do[es] not appear to be controlled by one or more registered political parties, nor do[es it] appear to operate wholly or to a significant extent to the benefit of one or more registered political parties. In particular, the currently available information does not show a real or actual benefit to any party or parties, nor does it show a sufficiently direct link between the entities and any political party or parties.

3) The AEC’s more thorough position as at 2010 when the matter was again referred
AEC conclusion
The AEC has reviewed the previous information in its possession together with the additional material that has come into the public domain since 2006. The results of this review are that there is still no information or available evidence to show that GetUp meets any of the six grounds set out in the definition of an “associated entity” contained in subsection 287(1) of the Electoral Act.

The AEC has also considered the previous information in its possession and the lists of all the GetUp campaigns set out on its website. The AEC readily acknowledges that many of GetUp activities could be reasonably regarded as of some “benefit” to the ‘left’ parties (e.g. the anti-Coalition Senate campaign in the ACT prior to the 2007 election). However, the AEC also notes that many of the activities of GetUp appear to be solely issue based rather than supporting or advocating support for a particular registered party political.

The AEC is of the view that the present information and available evidence is unlikely to be sufficient to enable a Court in a criminal prosecution to find that GetUp is operating “wholly, or to a significant extent” for the benefit of either/both the Australian Labor Party and/or the Greens.

#10
chewy142:05 pm, 23 Oct 12

The Greens and GetUp aren’t related…. they just simply agree on issues a lot.

#11
LSWCHP2:06 pm, 23 Oct 12

Skidbladnir said :

SnapperJack said :

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

1) Way to go on the Godwin’s Law there, buddy.

2) The AEC’s position on GetUp in 2005
[GetUp] do[es] not appear to be controlled by one or more registered political parties, nor do[es it] appear to operate wholly or to a significant extent to the benefit of one or more registered political parties. In particular, the currently available information does not show a real or actual benefit to any party or parties, nor does it show a sufficiently direct link between the entities and any political party or parties.

3) The AEC’s more thorough position as at 2010 when the matter was again referred
AEC conclusion
The AEC has reviewed the previous information in its possession together with the additional material that has come into the public domain since 2006. The results of this review are that there is still no information or available evidence to show that GetUp meets any of the six grounds set out in the definition of an “associated entity” contained in subsection 287(1) of the Electoral Act.

The AEC has also considered the previous information in its possession and the lists of all the GetUp campaigns set out on its website. The AEC readily acknowledges that many of GetUp activities could be reasonably regarded as of some “benefit” to the ‘left’ parties (e.g. the anti-Coalition Senate campaign in the ACT prior to the 2007 election). However, the AEC also notes that many of the activities of GetUp appear to be solely issue based rather than supporting or advocating support for a particular registered party political.

The AEC is of the view that the present information and available evidence is unlikely to be sufficient to enable a Court in a criminal prosecution to find that GetUp is operating “wholly, or to a significant extent” for the benefit of either/both the Australian Labor Party and/or the Greens.

You know Skid, I think you really are the smartest guy in this room. I’d like to buy you a beer sometime.

#12
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd2:15 pm, 23 Oct 12

460cixy said :

SnapperJack said :

Thank you Simon for confirming what we all knew about GetUp! The Libs were right when they called GetUp! the Hitler Youth wing of the Australian Greens movement.

So very true

I guess you seem to be even dimmer than snapper jack then.

#13
LegalNut2:19 pm, 23 Oct 12

Oh. My. God! An organisation that is clearly focussed on issues that are to the left of the political spectum has a former leader who has view that are more closely aligned to the Greens than the Liberals. I’m shocked!

For goodness sake, this isn’t anything surprising, it isn’t a conspiracy and just because you don’t agree that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

Frankly, Gary Humphrey’s hasn’t actually done anything useful recently. He has gotten stale and I wouldn’t mind seeing a change. Simon Sheikh is passionate, dedicate and appears to work hard to achieve his goals. That’s something I’m happy to get behind.

#14
Devil_n_Disquiz2:43 pm, 23 Oct 12

I had to google Godwin’s Law. #justsayin

#15
Mysteryman3:30 pm, 23 Oct 12

LegalNut said :

Oh. My. God! An organisation that is clearly focussed on issues that are to the left of the political spectum has a former leader who has view that are more closely aligned to the Greens than the Liberals. I’m shocked!

For goodness sake, this isn’t anything surprising, it isn’t a conspiracy and just because you don’t agree that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

Frankly, Gary Humphrey’s hasn’t actually done anything useful recently. He has gotten stale and I wouldn’t mind seeing a change. Simon Sheikh is passionate, dedicate and appears to work hard to achieve his goals. That’s something I’m happy to get behind.

While it’s not surprising, it’s certainly deceptive and a little under-handed. Especially when considering the constant claims by GetUp! that they are not a political organisation. They obviously are. This sort of behaviour speaks volumes to their credibility.

Also, it seems you don’t understand the role of the Senate, or of Senators. Perhaps you should look into what they actually do before making comments about how “useful” they are. I notice you didn’t comment on Kate Lundy’s usefulness. What do you think it is that she is doing that pleases you so much?

#16
PantsMan3:32 pm, 23 Oct 12

PantsMan said :

Senator Abetz described GetUp! as a partisan left wing union front which uses people’s concern about issues to funnel their vote towards Labor and the Greens.

+1

#17
Bosworth4:28 pm, 23 Oct 12

Godwin has already been reached by only the third comment!

#18
Jim Jones4:37 pm, 23 Oct 12

“GetUp is an independent, grass-roots community advocacy organisation which aims to build a more progressive Australia by giving everyday Australians the opportunity to get involved and hold politicians accountable on important issues.”

How is that deceptive or underhanded?

The only way I could see it being deceptive or underhanded is if you’re the sort of conservative reactionary who froths at the mouth over ‘Hitler Youth Communist Satanists who wish to enslave us all and destroy our way of live’.

#19
johnboy4:38 pm, 23 Oct 12

nazis riding dinosaurs through rivers of blood I tells you

#20
c_c™4:38 pm, 23 Oct 12

GetUp was always lefty, and if they were open an honest about that I would respect them. That they kept up a bipartisan pretence, that they were somehow a-political, was moronic.

But knowing that they’re lefty, Simon’s announcement of going Green yesterday wasn’t surprising, though I do wonder why he’s going for an ACT senate seat?

#21
LegalNut4:42 pm, 23 Oct 12

Mysteryman said :

LegalNut said :

Oh. My. God! An organisation that is clearly focussed on issues that are to the left of the political spectum has a former leader who has view that are more closely aligned to the Greens than the Liberals. I’m shocked!

For goodness sake, this isn’t anything surprising, it isn’t a conspiracy and just because you don’t agree that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

Frankly, Gary Humphrey’s hasn’t actually done anything useful recently. He has gotten stale and I wouldn’t mind seeing a change. Simon Sheikh is passionate, dedicate and appears to work hard to achieve his goals. That’s something I’m happy to get behind.

While it’s not surprising, it’s certainly deceptive and a little under-handed. Especially when considering the constant claims by GetUp! that they are not a political organisation. They obviously are. This sort of behaviour speaks volumes to their credibility.

Also, it seems you don’t understand the role of the Senate, or of Senators. Perhaps you should look into what they actually do before making comments about how “useful” they are. I notice you didn’t comment on Kate Lundy’s usefulness. What do you think it is that she is doing that pleases you so much?

I perfectly well understand the role of the Senate. The problem with Humphreys is that he is not an active advocate for the ACT. He hasn’t worked to temper the negative messaging about Canberra being spouted by the opposition. On the other hand, Lundy is at least out there, contributing to policy development and serving as an effective junior minister in the government.

As for the credibility question, it is really no different to right wing groups that focus on issues of interest to the right. I wouldn’t expect Liberals to be supportive of GetUp in the same way that I don’t expect Laborites to be supportive of the Sydney Institute or any other Liberal party think tank.

#22
johnboy4:42 pm, 23 Oct 12

Apparently he’s been living here since he quit GetUp in July.

#23
tuco5:18 pm, 23 Oct 12

johnboy said :

nazis riding dinosaurs through rivers of blood I tells you

But there’ll be zombies right? Someone said they’d be zombies …

#24
Mysteryman5:22 pm, 23 Oct 12

LegalNut said :

Mysteryman said :

LegalNut said :

Oh. My. God! An organisation that is clearly focussed on issues that are to the left of the political spectum has a former leader who has view that are more closely aligned to the Greens than the Liberals. I’m shocked!

For goodness sake, this isn’t anything surprising, it isn’t a conspiracy and just because you don’t agree that doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

Frankly, Gary Humphrey’s hasn’t actually done anything useful recently. He has gotten stale and I wouldn’t mind seeing a change. Simon Sheikh is passionate, dedicate and appears to work hard to achieve his goals. That’s something I’m happy to get behind.

While it’s not surprising, it’s certainly deceptive and a little under-handed. Especially when considering the constant claims by GetUp! that they are not a political organisation. They obviously are. This sort of behaviour speaks volumes to their credibility.

Also, it seems you don’t understand the role of the Senate, or of Senators. Perhaps you should look into what they actually do before making comments about how “useful” they are. I notice you didn’t comment on Kate Lundy’s usefulness. What do you think it is that she is doing that pleases you so much?

I perfectly well understand the role of the Senate. The problem with Humphreys is that he is not an active advocate for the ACT. He hasn’t worked to temper the negative messaging about Canberra being spouted by the opposition. On the other hand, Lundy is at least out there, contributing to policy development and serving as an effective junior minister in the government.

The role of the Senate is to serve as an accountability mechanism, and Humphries has done that through his work in the chamber, as well as the committee work he’s been engaged in, and his roles as Shadow Parliamentary Secretary. But you think that Humphries should be working to advocate for the ACT by giving out positive messages about it? He’s a Senator, not a tourism promoter. And you Lundy is ok because she’s “out there” (wherever that is) being a Junior Minister? Your criteria for what makes an effective senator doesn’t seem very consistent. Perhaps what you’re really getting at is that you don’t like Humphries because he’s a Liberal senator? If that’s the case, just say it.

You’re also raising the issue of the perceived “negativity” of the opposition. You’re just regurgitating Labor’s diversionary tactics. Did you ever listen to what went on in parliament before the 43rd parliament? Or when Labor was in opposition? Here’s a news flash: oppositions generally oppose the government of the day because they disagree on policy. That’s what they do.

#25
c_c™5:23 pm, 23 Oct 12

johnboy said :

Apparently he’s been living here since he quit GetUp in July.

Might be an idea then to give him a pop quiz. 10 questions about issues affecting Canberrans to see if he’s serious.

#26
Deref5:27 pm, 23 Oct 12

Sorry to see that he’s not running as an independent.

#27
Masquara5:36 pm, 23 Oct 12

Wot? Give us a break, Simon. Getup is the hard union left’s attempt at harnessing the ignorant Byron Bay hinterland types isn’t it? Or is that “Change.org”? They’re all sinister. Git outta here, Simon Sheikh. Gawn – git! And yes, if Kerry Tucker couldn’t unseat Gazza, you haven’t a snowflake’s.

#28
pepmeup5:47 pm, 23 Oct 12

johnboy said :

Apparently he’s been living here since he quit GetUp in July.

He moved in to my street on Saturday, I was walking past and met him, he seems like a really nice guy.

I find it unlikley he can take Gary’s seat, Gary only needs 34% and it’s unlikely the conservative vote will ever fall below that level. Is there any chance he could out poll Kate Lundy? Maybe his name and popularity can get him over that level, I guess we will see with in 12 months

#29
poetix6:00 pm, 23 Oct 12

poetix said :

Gazza Strait?

Hardly, after Saturday.

Now I am truly depressed. I stuffed up my joke, confusing the words strait and strip. I’m surprised about 5000 geographers haven’t picked me up on it.

#30
pepmeup6:15 pm, 23 Oct 12

Given both major parties are cutting the APS, couldn’t the greens run a strong local campaign on saving jobs, the greens will still have the balance of power in the upper house after the election, and could actually save som jobs in negotiations. Is that to complex a story to campaign on? They could get votes off both sides and probably beat the ALP

Follow
Follow The RiotACT
Get Premium Membership
Advertisement
The-RiotACT.com Newsletter Sign Up

Images of Canberra

Advertisement
Sponsors
RiotACT Proudly Supports
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.