Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Election Wrap – 22 September

By johnboy 22 September 2008 40

Greens:

The Canberra Times reports that the Greens’ Amanda Bresnan is going to push for more ethical investment of the millions of our dollars the Government currently invests on our behalf in tobacco and cluster bombs. Amanda’s statement has now gone online

Labor:

Andrew Barr is accusing the Liberals of plotting to return entry fees to Floriade. (*GASP*)

Katy Gallagher’s promising to sort out locum GPs in aged care facilities if she gets another swing at the pinata.

John Hargreaves reckons that he’s already delivering “most” of what the Motorist’s Party is promising.

Katy Gallagher has also decided that she can afford to promise a $12 million “multi-pronged and workable plan” (as opposed to what dare we ask?) to support local doctors, particularly the endangered General Practitioners.

Motorists Party:

The AMP have produced a laundry list of things they’d like to do with roads. Starting with “take direct control of all planning and decisions regarding investment in, and development of, Canberra’s road infrastructure.”

They’re also promising to harmonise ACT rego with NSW.

Richard Mulcahy’s Canberra Party:

The Canberra Party have rediscovered their website and pumped out 16 media releases today. Here’s a quick look at them:

Liberal Aged Care policy is no good.
Richard would like to debate Jon Stanhope if anyone cares.
Richard sneers at Zed’s demands the Canberra Party declare who they’d support to form government.
Richard would like to know more about Labor knobbling the WIN newsroom.
Richard would like two nurses specialising in the treatment of Parkinson’s disease.
Richard wants to know if the Liberals are really as bone-headed as he is on drug paraphenalia.
Richard is worried that Green Square is going to be ripped up.
Richard is worried about internal divisions in the Liberal party.
Richard think both the major parties are arse and you should vote for him instead.
Richard thinks the ALP and Greens are silly for not agreeing with him on the sale of drug paraphenalia.
Richard has a chuckle about his nemesis Bill Stefaniak walking out on the Liberals.
Richard says Bongs are Bad M’kay?.
Richard thinks you’re paying too much tax.
Richard is worried about limiting the power of body corp nazis.
Richard didn’t think much of Nicola Roxon’s speech last month.
Richard thinks parties should take it easy with election promises.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
40 Responses to
Election Wrap – 22 September
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
jakez 7:01 pm 22 Sep 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Jakez, the ACT has a suite of measures such as the Robson rotation, modified Hare-Clark, etc that are designed to ensure that everyone has a more even chance of being elected.

I view the signage laws as part of those measures. Plastering signs all over the place costs a fortune. If 1/ bigger parties do not plaster $000s worth of signs illegally everywhere and 2/ rangers enforce the laws, then the little person who doesn’t have said $000s behind their campaign has somewhat of a more even chance at election.

If the laws are ignored, then those with the $$$ are logically that much more likely to win. Therefore it is the election result itself that is at risk if the laws are ignored – a little more than “pencil wounds” as you put it.

I believe the ACT has one of the fairest electoral systems in the country, I value the cornerstones of our democracy, and therefore hold enforcement of such laws as very important.

(I actually wrote more and better, but RA’s database flakiness has got the better of my more erudite musings on more than one occasion today…)

I absolutely agree with you Gungahlin Al. I thinkwe have a great system (except for Robson rotation). Unfortunately Hare Clarke has been subverted by very disciplined and ‘united’ major parties but nothing is perfect.

I’m not saying that the signage is good. I’m not saying it’s fine. I’m simply saying that it represents a small wrong in a sea of gigantic wrongs.

We probably have radically different views of what constitutes good government and it is through that prism that you should analyse my views. I’m not saying this is great, I’m simply saying that the way things are, it’s not a big issue for me.

You are of course free to value this differently and I respect that even though I don’t agree.

Gungahlin Al 4:49 pm 22 Sep 08

Granny, the exact words I said to myself immediately after I clicked Post (bracketed by other words that raised eyebrows at this end…).

Granny 4:34 pm 22 Sep 08

Gungahlin Al, you have to copy your text before you post.

Gungahlin Al 4:26 pm 22 Sep 08

Jakez, the ACT has a suite of measures such as the Robson rotation, modified Hare-Clark, etc that are designed to ensure that everyone has a more even chance of being elected.

I view the signage laws as part of those measures. Plastering signs all over the place costs a fortune. If 1/ bigger parties do not plaster $000s worth of signs illegally everywhere and 2/ rangers enforce the laws, then the little person who doesn’t have said $000s behind their campaign has somewhat of a more even chance at election.

If the laws are ignored, then those with the $$$ are logically that much more likely to win. Therefore it is the election result itself that is at risk if the laws are ignored – a little more than “pencil wounds” as you put it.

I believe the ACT has one of the fairest electoral systems in the country, I value the cornerstones of our democracy, and therefore hold enforcement of such laws as very important.

(I actually wrote more and better, but RA’s database flakiness has got the better of my more erudite musings on more than one occasion today…)

jakez 3:31 pm 22 Sep 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Ah I see – so all laws are not created equal? So what other LAWS should our *law-makers* be able to disregard Jakez? Where do you draw the line?

And the potential for another candidates who obeys the signs laws not getting elected as a result of their obeyance, while someone who breaks the law does get in, landing themselves a quite handsome 6-figure salary to boot – that doesn’t bother you? Free-for-alls cheerfully accepted?

I think taking a well known adage that was clearly facetious, and pretending it was my comprehensive policy on electoral laws is patently absurd.

Like I said, I view a tyrant who obeyed the election rules worse than a non tyrant who nuffed the rules. There are so many terrible terrible things a politician can do that I simply cannot afford to worry about this. If a mugger holds up a gun and a pencil, I for one would not be particularly concerned about pencil wounds.

Hence my previous statements about there being a range of measures to inhibit abuse of incumbency.

(PS: I’d be saying the same thing regardless of what party the signs belonged to. Would you?)

You may not know but I am a Liberal. This is why I added the following to my previous post.

“The ALP, Greens, or LDP could break these rules up the yin yang, but considering the real damage politicians can do on a number of issues once they get in, it would not register as a factor in my voting.”

So yes, I would be saying the same thing no matter who it was.

Thumper 2:51 pm 22 Sep 08

Since the “Your Rights at Work” corflutes were disregarded by the *law-makers* for so long I can only agree that all laws are not created equal …

One must admit that granny has a point here…

Primal 2:50 pm 22 Sep 08

Thumper said :

In fact I rather the roadside signs to running the gauntlet of (insert Lib, ALP, CAP Raving Loony) party volunteers trying to shove election campaign material up my snout everytime I walk into a local shopping centre.

This, times infinity.

Granny 2:42 pm 22 Sep 08

Gungahlin Al said :

Ah I see – so all laws are not created equal? So what other LAWS should our *law-makers* be able to disregard Jakez? Where do you draw the line?

Since the “Your Rights at Work” corflutes were disregarded by the *law-makers* for so long I can only agree that all laws are not created equal ….

peterh 2:35 pm 22 Sep 08

how long till we see signs in front yards of staunch lib / ALP / green supporters? at least you don’t have to water them.

Aurelius 2:30 pm 22 Sep 08

In NSW & Qld, the law is the signs cannot be on public land, or obstructing street-signs.
I assume it is the same here, and therefore they cannot be on the roadside tied to light-poles.

Thumper 2:25 pm 22 Sep 08

Oh yeah, that i can agree on 😉

Gungahlin Al 2:21 pm 22 Sep 08

I think there’ve been too many “sings” put around by candidates too Thumper – and they should stop that too – please?

Thumper 2:19 pm 22 Sep 08

sings…

idiot, *signs*..

Thumper 2:19 pm 22 Sep 08

Yeah, the signs are a non issue for me as well. If ALP and CAP want to put sings everywhere then I have no gripe whatsoever.

In fact I rather the roadside signs to running the gauntlet of (insert Lib, ALP, CAP Raving Loony) party volunteers trying to shove election campaign material up my snout everytime I walk into a local shopping centre.

tom-tom 2:03 pm 22 Sep 08

oh; and the ‘unethical’ investments are according to my understanding (from a CT article a while back) part of the super scheme for public servants not just the govt making extra cash or saving for a rainy day.

tom-tom 1:59 pm 22 Sep 08

for me roadside signs are a bit of a non issue; wont change my vote either way (rather vote on policy and experience etc) but i guess for most people they’d be a good way of boosting name recognition.

in my opinion if you want to stop the practise then actually fine the people who put them out instead of the current fee to get confiscated ones back. (98 bucks each or 3 bucks for a new one…tough call)

can someone confirm exactly what the rules are? my understanding is they can be on the side of the road (not on the median strip) andmust be up under their own steam, not leaning on anything etc. can anyone confirm this?

Gungahlin Al 1:56 pm 22 Sep 08

Ah I see – so all laws are not created equal? So what other LAWS should our *law-makers* be able to disregard Jakez? Where do you draw the line?

And the potential for another candidates who obeys the signs laws not getting elected as a result of their obeyance, while someone who breaks the law does get in, landing themselves a quite handsome 6-figure salary to boot – that doesn’t bother you? Free-for-alls cheerfully accepted?

An election is too important – fairness, equity and level playing field are critical.

Hence my previous statements about there being a range of measures to inhibit abuse of incumbency.

(PS: I’d be saying the same thing regardless of what party the signs belonged to. Would you?)

jakez 1:19 pm 22 Sep 08

Gungahlin Al said :

I note an interesting story in the CT a couple of days back about the sheer volume of Liberal signs that have been confiscated by the government, accompanied by a photo of one independent who also helpfully collected a bunch and returned them to the Liberal offices.

Now sign wars are a common thing in most elections. However in ACT there are some very definitive laws governing what one can and cannot do in relation to election signage.

I remind people that these candidates are asking for you vote to make them the law-MAKERS of the ACT.

So what sort of law-makers would someone make who themselves can’t (or worse – won’t) even follow this most basic of laws?

Well as they say, rules were made to be broken.

The ALP, Greens, or LDP could break these rules up the yin yang, but considering the real damage politicians can do on a number of issues once they get in, it would not register as a factor in my voting.

Granny 1:13 pm 22 Sep 08

Or Stanhope staffer and graffiti ….

Thumper 1:10 pm 22 Sep 08

So what sort of law-makers would someone make who themselves can’t (or worse – won’t) even follow this most basic of laws?

You mean like Hargreaves and driving 😉

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2018 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site