I’ve previously posted on the fact that the Courier-Mail has been beside itself with early election speculation for quite some time now. The logic advanced by several commentators that Anna Bligh would call an election because the last Newspoll showed a turnaround in Labor’s fortunes was always dubious, if not fatuous. The ALP would have much better data from regular tracking polls than from a quarterly public poll. Newspoll is not the centre of the political universe. And there’s every chance that Labor’s advantage will improve as the election approaches and the Borg’s shiny new political vehicle starts to lumber down its accustomed country roads, taking the occasional ill judged turn to the right.
Now, the folks at the C-M have noticed that the last date for “a traditional Saturday election” in mid February – the time at which they were claiming that the poll would occur – has passed. (Incidentally, Anna Bligh’s not likely to call an “unprecedented Tuesday election” which would be illegal anyway…) However, it seems beyond the call of duty for the C-M to admit that their ungrounded speculation was just wrong. In quite a bizarre twist, they’ve flicked the switch to populism and published a story which is accompanied by a shooting gallery of pollies “who will get to claim $63,500 for life”. The logic (if that’s the word) behind this is that supposedly the predicted early election hasn’t been held so that the said pollies can qualify for their super.
Never mind the fact that a large number of the pollies named aren’t retiring and quite a few hold safe seats.
Acting Premier Paul Lucas told the Courier-Mail the super qualification deadline was “irrelevant” and that’s almost certainly not spin. The frenzied imagination of Brisbane’s only major newspaper and its preference for flicking the switch to populism rather than admitting error doesn’t bode well for the standard of coverage of the campaign when it eventuates. But that will suit the ALP just fine, and more’s the pity for those who think the media might have some role in ensuring accountability from a government with a fat majority in parliament.
“With early election speculation rife,”
Certainly noticed that. At the pubs and clubs the punters can talk of little else. Unbelieveable!
But I must listen to Radio Courier Mail to-morrow to see if the theme dominates. But maybe I am too late. Today was probably the time.
Yes, I think I was behind the eight ball with this one, wpd. Possibly because I wasn’t actually expecting an election in February! Anyway, I neglected to check the C-M website until this arvo, so I’m no doubt behind the media cycle now and the C-M will ignore the fact that they ever tipped an early election – unless they start tipping one for March, in which case they certainly will never have tipped one for February.
Ps – no doubt I’m also remiss for not bothering to listen to Radio Courier-Mail!
On reflection Mark, I think Radio CM might still be in ‘national mode’ and therefore local issues might be absent. These days as I walk or ride my bike, News Radio is my preference.
But I will check to-morrow on Mrs Fagan’s latest insights and pontifications(if she is back).
Yesterday we were treated to a somewhat more considered article by Paul Williams.Best National Research was polling residents in Chatsworth earlier this week and my own suburb was letterboxed by the Liberal National Party today. I was out at Samford on Saturday and the Liberal National Party had a information booth set up in Main Street. Springborg might just be having a dummy run to see if anyone is prepared to follow him.
http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24933495-27197,00.html
@4 – do let us know if there are any insights, wpd!
@5 – steve, that does contain more sense than some of what’s in the C-M (and Dennis Atkins’ stuff on state politics is another exception to the rule), but to some degree Williams still appears to be pushing something of a C-M line. There’s a bit of irony here in light of the recent stoushes about bloggers supposedly being less likely to check facts than journos, because it strikes me that the majority of both the C-M reporters and pundits don’t appear to have any good sources within the Labor Party (as opposed to the LNP mob) and just feed off each other and their Newspoll obsession, rather than actually trying to find out what Labor’s plans (at this stage) are.
Mark, don’t forget that the latest Newspoll was at the same level,37% Primary, as the last election. The CM is actually feeding of Galaxy polls. Try and chart them and the most outstanding feature is the white space between when the CM actually bothers to publish them. The last few have been pro Liberal National Party.
Yep, good point, steve, though I wonder if the Galaxy polls are still being taken as often as they were. From what I hear, the budget at the C-M has been slashed to the bone, and News may not be paying for as much stuff for all the tabloids from Galaxy as it was. That might also explain a few things.
It may be why the CM want an early election too, Mark. Advertising from a poll and the associated poll controversy might be more needed by them than we know.
Yep, I wouldn’t be surprised at all, steve.
Meanwhile the Barnaby Joyce saga has moved to Mackay.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24945730-2702,00.html
We have always
been at war with the Eastpredicted a poll for March.The C-M wrote that:
The facts are that:
1. Karen Struthers was elected in 1998, not 2001. (The Mediocre Male has also previously stated that Karen is a member of the AWU faction when in fact she’s a member of the Left.)
2. Several of the members elected in 2001 would not have been written off as “one-term wonders” because their seats are rusted-on Labor (think Ipswich and Woodridge, for starters).
3. One of them (Ray Hopper) is an LNP MP, not Labor.
3. More than one of them, Paul!
Quite right, Mark. I missed Stuart Copeland. If the C-M ever runs a story on him, it will probably be accompanied by a photo of the Police drummer.
Yes, it’s drawing the longest possible bow, I’d have thought, to suggest Anna Bligh has been deciding on election timing so that Stuart Copeland’s attempts to get a parliamentary pension succeed!
In relation to Steve @ 9, the size of the print edition of the C-M is noticeably shrinking. It reminds me of those pictures of Posh Spice that you see in celebrity gossip magazines (six months ago, and now). They may need an election to get a cash infusion quickly, as no-one really knows what the balance sheet looks like, except to say that Newspapers are the only division of News Corporation worldwide that loses money.
Evidence I have seen suggests that online traffic to couriermail.com.au is growing, but a lot of that could be checking out what is happening during storm season.
The fall in the Courier Mail job advertisements has reduced itself to jobs for nurses and financial counselors being the mainstay, according to someone I know who currently reads that section of the paper.
“Yes, it’s drawing the longest possible bow, I’d have thought, to suggest Anna Bligh has been deciding on election timing so that Stuart Copeland’s attempts to get a parliamentary pension succeed!”
Sounds like animal logic.
It always struck me that CM classifieds was HUGELY dependent upon Queensland Government job advertising. Any information on whether there are fewer job ads being put into the paper by Qld. Govt would be very interesting. Particularly now that the mining boom magic pudding is starting to run out.
In other news, my suburb was letterboxed today by Michael Palmer. I’ve never seen such a sloppy and unprofessional piece of electoral material in my life – the thing was replete with spelling errors, logical fallacies, and they even managed to spell Bligh’s name wrong!
Not that I was voting for them anyway, but if this is going to be indicative of the quality of their campaign, you’d have to put a few bob on the ALP actually picking up seats!
Just for anyone who’s interested, the reason that Saturday elections are “traditional” is s 80(1)(c) of the Electoral Act 1992 (Qld):
“…the polling day, which must be a Saturday not less than
26 days, nor more than 56 days, after the issue of the
writ”.
“Traditional” just doesn’t seem the right word next to something like “mandated” or “legislated”, does it?
Terry @ 17. It doesn’t seem so long ago that they turned (literally) tabloid… and promised us that the “compact” edition wouldn’t lead to a degradation of quality. One mightn’t have thought it possible at the time…
So what do the Liberal National Party do now? Just go on pretending there will be a February election for their sunburnt and footsore supporters, change the date to sometime in March, the April, then May, then June etc. or do they keep going at this pace right through till September?
Maybe they could play the hare and tortoise game and sleep until August.Snore until the budget is delivered. Wake up the next time the Courier Mail sounds the clarion call,perhaps. Curl up in a small ball and become a small no policy target again. Decisions, decisions.
Steve @ 24: They could just keep filling up the Borg Bus and driving it around. I saw it parked in an unpaved “car park” section around the side of the Logan Hyperdome the other day. There was no one within cooee, but I suppose they are coming off a low base of support in the suburb of Loganholme…
I’m sure they would have been sitting out in a director’s chair in the blazing hot sun developing the skin cancer prevention part of their Health Policy in time for the February election, Sam.
Oh Dear,now we have the prospect of a serious split within the Liberal National Party as the Nationals try to steal a senate seat that has been promised to the Liberals under the merged party constitution.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24950563-5006786,00.html
Steve, an interesting aspect of this issue is whether the Queensland Parliament would be in breach of s15 of the Commonwealth Constitution if it appointed a member of the LNP rather than a member of the Nationals to the Senate vacancy. It seems to me that the Labor Party could have a great deal of fun at the LNP’s expense – and exact historical revenge for the appointment of Albert Field to the Senate in 1975 – by appointing a Nat to the vacancy on the pretext that s15 leaves it with no alternative.
Yes Steve, it’s a pearler of a story. Anna must be wondering, does it get any better than this, will I go now on the strength of it? Not that she’s got anything to worry about, and why waste 9 assured months of government now by not waiting till september, when things might not be so rosy at the other end of her next term? But maybe going to election when your opponents are at their weakest means you get most bums on parliamantary seats, and that’s what’s important.
Looking at the proposed senators, I’ve gotta say, who? And why? These people are nobodies, a sad endictment on how intra-party reward scheming has hijacked the raison-d’etre of the upper house. I can see what PJK was on about with his “Unrepresentative swill” crack, but look what you get when you get rid of the upper house: Queensland.
Paul, don’t know that they would have to stoop to that. I think there is enough confusion here to mess up the process.
[W.11 At the next half Senate election the following provisions shall apply to the endorsement and nomination
of Senate candidates for the Party:
(a) The order of candidates on the Senate ticket of the Liberal National Party of Queensland shall
be as follows:
1. A sitting Senator whose term is expiring, who is a former Liberal and who offers for re-election;
2. A sitting Senator whose term is expiring, who is a former National and who offers for
re- election;
3. A sitting Senator whose term is expiring, who is a former Liberal and who offers for
re-election;
4. A sitting Senator whose term is expiring, who is a former Liberal and who offers for
re-election;
(b) Amongst such sitting Senators, the order shall be as follows:-
(i) Senator the Hon. George Brandis;
(ii) Senator Barnaby Joyce
(iii) Senator the Hon. Brett Mason;
(iv) Senator Russell Trood.
(c) This clause is subject to any subsequent written agreement to the contrary signed for and on
behalf of and with the authority of the Liberal National Party of Queensland, the Liberal Party of
Australia and the National Party of Australia.
W.12 In the event that there is a casual vacancy in the Senate, should any existing Senator or Senators seek
endorsement for that position then the only candidate(s) who will be accepted for that endorsement
will be that existing Senator or Senators.
W.13 If any of the sitting Senators are not available for election, then the order as determined in (b)(i) to (iv)
above shall move up to close off any non available Senator and any further preselected candidate will
be added to the bottom of this order.]
http://www.lnp.org.au/images/stories/PDFs/LNPConstitution080808.pdf
steve, that makes no sense to me. If there’s a vacancy, a sitting senator is the candidate?? Huh?
And in any event, they can write what they want, doesn’t mean squat against the Constitution.
Where a vacancy has at any time occurred in the place of a senator chosen by the people of a State and, at the time when he was so chosen, he was publicly recognised by a particular political party as being an endorsed candidate, a person chosen or appointed under this section in consequence of that vacancy, or in consequence of that vacancy and a subsequent vacancy or vacancies, shall, unless there is no member of that party available to be chosen or appointed, be a member of that party.
Where
(a) in accordance with the last preceding paragraph, a member of a particular political party is chosen or appointed to hold the place of a senator whose place had become vacant; and
(b) before taking his seat he cease to be a member of that party (otherwise than by reason of the party having ceased to exist),
he shall be deemed not to have been so chosen or appointed and the vacancy shall be again notified in accordance with section twenty-one of this Constitution.
There sure is, Steve. My point is that s15 has yet to be applied in a situation where a Senator who is elected on a particular party ticket leaves to create a casual vacancy after that party has merged with another party which also contested that Senate election as a distinct party. Further, s15 provides no explicit guidance to the relevant State Parliament as to what to do in that situation. The LNP could argue that it is the legal successor to the National Party in Queensland and that the Parliament should accept its nominee, regardless of whether they were a Lib or a Nat at the last election, but I can also see an argument that the spirit and intent of s15 obliges the Queensland parliament to appoint, as a replacement for Joyce, somebody who represented themself as a National Party member at the last Senate election prior to the marger. Are there any constitutional lawyers out there who can help?
The ABS has released the latest Queensland stats today.
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Latestproducts/1318.3Main%20Features1Jan%202009?opendocument&tabname=Summary&prodno=1318.3&issue=Jan%202009&num=&view=
Paul, Section 15 has been applied in this situation. In 1977, Steele Hall resigned from the Senate to contest the House. He was a member of the Liberal Movement, a party that no longer existed. Don Dunstan applied the new Section 15 to decide that the Australian Democrats were the successor party to the Liberal Movement and Janine Haines was appointed to the vacancy.
The use of Party in Section 15 has nothing to do with the registration of political parties under the electoral act. Section 15 was inserted by referendum, 7 years before there were registered parties. The meaning of ‘Party’ in any case would be determined by the High Court as no definition of what a party is was inserted into the Constitution. The Constitution is not subserviant to the registration of parties in the Electoral Act, and if a case of this type reached the High Court, the Court would take a broader meaning of party than that defined in the Electoral Act.
If there was a continuing Liberal or National Party seperate from the LNP, it would be more complex. The Queensland Parliament can basically appoint anyone they like, but the eligibility of anyone appointed can be challenged at once in the courts and if they were not from the same party, they would be prevented from taking their seat. If an LNP member was appointed to replace a Liberal or a National, someone with a lot of money could challenge the appointment before the High Court, but I doubt they would win. The Queensland Government could have some fun along the way, but I think the only person they could appoint would come from the LNP. It is the only a successor party.
And further, most states have a similar provision relating to vacancies in their Legislative Councils. Most have had legal opinions about what to do if someone resigned who was an Independent or member of a party that no longer existed. The view is it is someone who can be viewed as some form of logical succesor and accepted as being associated with the former member. Secondly, they have to be logical enough as a successor to withstand a challenge to their position by somebody who has some other claim to be a succesor.
And on my argument about successor parrties. It is clear the Libs and Nats have only one successor party, the LNP. If the government tried to appoint an ex-National, then because there is no National Party anymore, this ex-National would have to be a member of the LNP. If the LNP then expelled him, he couldn’t take the vacancy. Whoever is appointed must be the accepted candidate of the LNP.
Another example. In 1987, Don Grimes resigned as a Tasmanian Senator. Labor pre-selected John Devereaux. Premier Robin Gray objected to him but Labor said Devereaux or nobody. By this stage Gray had whipped the parliament into a lather on the issue and they voted against Devereaux. The seat had to be left vacant as a result. The issue was sorted out by the subsequent double dissolution.
John Howard to his credit told Gray to fill the vacancy with Labor’s nominee. And when the Tasmanian Parliament didn’t fill the seat, Howard refused to take advantage of the situation and gave Labor a pair for the vacant Senate position.
I think Bligh would be under pressure to behave honourably, as did Don Dunstan, and the Federal Labor would be under pressure to behave honourably as did John Howard.
I was with you until I saw “Howard” and “honourable” in the same sentence without a “not”.
Oh, and whale meat is over rated. What’s dugong like? Less fat, should be ok as sashimi or maybe skewered with lemon, capsicum, and pineapple.
The last time there was a senate vacancy the Queensland Government sought legal advice on the validity of the Liberal Party constitution.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/bligh-seeks-legal-advice-on-new-senator/2007/03/23/1174597864883.html?s_cid=rss_brisbanetimes
Subtle change back to the old script from Nicholls.
[An 18-year-old Liberal National Party candidate has broken ranks with his party to call on Queensland Premier Anna Bligh to hold an election next month.
Michael Palmer, the son of billionaire LNP benefactor Clive Palmer, on Friday called on Ms Bligh to hold an election at the next available date, February 21.]
OOps, the link is here:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/queensland/teen-lnp-candidate-ignores-party-line/2009/01/23/1232471580187.html
Small point Mark,we have always been at war with Eurasia
Antony, thanks for the clarifications.
There must be a new Galaxy that the C-M is sitting on, given that little snippet in Sunday’s paper under the Poison Dwarf’s byline regarding the supposed perception of failure with the taxation adjustments to pre-mixed drinks.
Perhaps it is unfavourable to the Pineapple Party and has been buried.