Wrong again but keep thinking that …

You have fallen for the media image of the Mayor. You weren’t closely involved in the water debate or you would know the tactics she used against people and businesses in Toowoomba to try to get her way.

“This time however having seen and learned from all that looking, pointing and cringing, things will be different this time round.”

Do you think you can change people’s perceptions in a 6 week period? Look at the statistics.

Winning side – we’ll see …

The Northern Territory statehood vote saw the LCP Government run a godforsaken incompetent campaign in support of the yes case.

Finally, the Toowoomba water vote was just a political beat-up just to put pressure on the Queensland Government on the eve of an election.

All these could have been won under different political circumstances. Many of the other votes I am unfamiliar with may also have been won if handled differently.

the art of referendum campaigning is much less well developed and well understood than the art of election campaigning. Further, insofar as the most common and well-developed techniques of election campaigning are applicable to referendum campaigns, they are much more effectively applicable to “Noâ€? campaigns than to “Yesâ€? campaigns. This is particularly true of modern political advertising techniques

I dont think negative advertising is the reason for the failure of refferenda in Australia. They have always faced an uphill battle, well before attack advertising became the weapon of political choice.

The statistics show that in the pre-modern advertising era (1901-66) only four out of 24 successful refferenda – a 16% success rate. In the post-modern advertising era (1967-200?) there have been four out of 17 successful refferenda – slighltly less than 25% success rate.

Australians are properly conservative about changing their constitution. As they should be given the atrocious record of political and cultural constructivsts in the past generation.

God only knows what nonsense we would be lumbered with now if last seasons ideological fashions were easily foisted upon us every time someone meddling busybody got a referendum idea rattling around their nut.

The conservative general rule is the higher the scale the slower the pace. Social change is better handled the lower it goes. It is okay for locals individuals to have makeovers. But global insitutions should be steady as she goes.

As if arrangements were intended
For nothing else but to be amended

Michael Oakshott

I was an interested bystander during the last vote. By that I mean I read the Toowoomba Chronical daily, the Liberal Party website, the water futures website, the state Government press releases, the Courious Snail, the Australian, the National Party website and Lyal Sheltons blogspot which was a hoot only because of the wit and charm of Agent X who really was hilarious.

I don’t think I even bothered to make a comment on the issue at the time but was appalled with the way that the National Party used the issue obviously thinking that they were going to win the ensuing state election on “health” and “water”.

Even the genisis of the vote being bunged on by the Federal Government to allow for cheap political shots in the lead-in to the state election was sus in my view.

This time however having seen and learned from all that looking, pointing and cringing, things will be different this time round. What I was trying to point out when accused of offending non-national aligned people was that it is a different ballgame now at a far bigger and more intense level and the nonsense of the “no” vote supporters will not cut the mustard this time around.

Nor will the influence of ex-mayors be as great given the bigger pool for the next stoush

I still think that the Nationals stand to lose what little credibility they have left if they opt for the same tactics as they displayed in Toowoomba last time but we will soon know which way they jump.

If you thought the last vote was exciting then you will enjoy this trip – pity you aren’t on the winning side but that is a matter of personal preference.

Why is it that the pro-recyclers always climb down into the gutter of name calling at every opportunity? It’s bizarre!

Council never put the NWC online and, at over 300 pages, none of the No side ever did either. Suggest asking the Council for a copy. I’m sure they would be very obliging! I’d like a few pro-recyclers to understand just how hard it is to get the ‘secret’ documents out of Thorley and her gang.

Don’t worry – Toowoomba has plenty of water options – you’re justing falling for the Thorley rhetoric – see – http://media.putfile.com/Thorley-AEF-conference-speech

Beats me how a campaign can be won by keeping documents secret but I am sure there will be absolutely deluges about the benefits of purified water.

Without reading the said document , it seems clear to me that sooner or later barring a depression from a cyclone, Toowoomba will be at risk of running out of water if the referendum result is repeated next time around but that is not likely to happen really is it? Especially with the leadership vaccum on the recycled sewerage side of the fence.