Australia General Discussion
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 04:46:29 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Australia General Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 96
Author Topic: Australia General Discussion  (Read 249634 times)
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1250 on: April 15, 2014, 09:12:55 PM »

If he's charged with perjury... what are potential sentences?

Jail... massive fines. I doubt it will go that far, but the fact is there is a serious failure of the smell-test on this one.

Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1251 on: April 15, 2014, 09:34:09 PM »

I suspect this was a genuine mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate lie, however lying under oath is lying under oath, and that's what's brought him down - not that he accepted a bottle of wine. I suspect he won't have the book thrown at him, perhaps a plea bargain, or even if not, a not especially heavy sentence.
Logged
Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends
Anton Kreitzer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,167
Australia


Political Matrix
E: 8.00, S: 3.11

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1252 on: April 15, 2014, 11:29:05 PM »

I suspect this was a genuine mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate lie, however lying under oath is lying under oath, and that's what's brought him down - not that he accepted a bottle of wine. I suspect he won't have the book thrown at him, perhaps a plea bargain, or even if not, a not especially heavy sentence.

I hope it was a genuine mistake too. As you said though, lying under oath is lying under oath.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1253 on: April 16, 2014, 12:21:34 AM »

I suspect this was a genuine mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate lie, however lying under oath is lying under oath, and that's what's brought him down - not that he accepted a bottle of wine. I suspect he won't have the book thrown at him, perhaps a plea bargain, or even if not, a not especially heavy sentence.

I hope it was a genuine mistake too. As you said though, lying under oath is lying under oath.

Again... I'm conflicted. The general view is... how the hell do you forget receiving a bottle of Grange, let alone one that is that rare and valuable AND writing a thank you note, to someone that you're in fairy regular contact with?

That's the part that bothers me... it just makes so little sense. Plus, if he was unsure... why make such a strong and clear denial? 'I'm not 100% sure, please let me check records so I can be accurate in my testimony' - the media wouldn't like it... but it at least would be accurate. The look of horror on his face when the phone record was produced last night ... was special.

So, part of me thinks he either genuinely forgot (which I find odd and little disturbing) or he oversold his denial thinking he could get away with it.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,621
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1254 on: April 16, 2014, 12:59:07 AM »

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.
Logged
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,678
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1255 on: April 16, 2014, 01:01:31 AM »

Holy crap that was unexpected. Plus I heard he was meant to meet the British royals today, but didn't in the end. Wow.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1256 on: April 16, 2014, 01:51:13 AM »

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.

I do understand... when you've spent the last what? 5-7 years running around saying "they're corrupt, we are (and most importantly I am) clean..." The scent, the whiff of something off, was going to kill his brand.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,189
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1257 on: April 16, 2014, 03:01:29 AM »

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.

I do understand... when you've spent the last what? 5-7 years running around saying "they're corrupt, we are (and most importantly I am) clean..." The scent, the whiff of something off, was going to kill his brand.

To be fair, it is New South Wales. Isn't that considered the Illinois of Australian politics?

Also, wow. Does any federal or state leader last more than a term in Australian politics? They get replaced like poor quality lightbulbs.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,621
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1258 on: April 16, 2014, 03:18:15 AM »

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.

I do understand... when you've spent the last what? 5-7 years running around saying "they're corrupt, we are (and most importantly I am) clean..." The scent, the whiff of something off, was going to kill his brand.

To be fair, it is New South Wales. Isn't that considered the Illinois of Australian politics?

Also, wow. Does any federal or state leader last more than a term in Australian politics? They get replaced like poor quality lightbulbs.
Pretty much, yeah. Can't think of the last government who wasn't involved in corruption. McKell's?

Barnett is in his second full term ftr.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1259 on: April 16, 2014, 01:18:56 PM »

To be fair, it is New South Wales. Isn't that considered the Illinois of Australian politics?

No, because political life in NSW has been fundamentally corrupt for longer than Illinois has even existed Tongue
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1260 on: April 16, 2014, 05:53:34 PM »

The Liberal party meeting has been moved to this afternoon. They apparently want an unopposed election.
Logged
RogueBeaver
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,058
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1261 on: April 16, 2014, 06:05:36 PM »

Reports that Baird will be the next Premier.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1262 on: April 16, 2014, 08:14:48 PM »

Reports that Baird will be the next Premier.

Yep, he and Berejiklian apparently met last night and this morning and decided that (despite her probably having slightly more support) and close leadership ballot was not in the interests of the party.
Logged
Smid
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,151
Australia


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1263 on: April 16, 2014, 08:21:24 PM »

I suspect this was a genuine mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate lie, however lying under oath is lying under oath, and that's what's brought him down - not that he accepted a bottle of wine. I suspect he won't have the book thrown at him, perhaps a plea bargain, or even if not, a not especially heavy sentence.

I hope it was a genuine mistake too. As you said though, lying under oath is lying under oath.

Again... I'm conflicted. The general view is... how the hell do you forget receiving a bottle of Grange, let alone one that is that rare and valuable AND writing a thank you note, to someone that you're in fairy regular contact with?

That's the part that bothers me... it just makes so little sense. Plus, if he was unsure... why make such a strong and clear denial? 'I'm not 100% sure, please let me check records so I can be accurate in my testimony' - the media wouldn't like it... but it at least would be accurate. The look of horror on his face when the phone record was produced last night ... was special.

So, part of me thinks he either genuinely forgot (which I find odd and little disturbing) or he oversold his denial thinking he could get away with it.

I agree with almost all of this (I think it can make a bit more sense, and that there may be a reason he felt he didn't need to check records before responding, but I'll come back to that). I have also heard the look on his face was something to behold - but I think it was due to a high level of stress at realising he'd completely painted himself into a corner with strong denials that have turned out to be untrue. I still think it was mistake, rather than malicious, but regardless, he realised he'd made very strong denials and evidence has come out that they are untrue. I can understand a look of horror.

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.

I do understand... when you've spent the last what? 5-7 years running around saying "they're corrupt, we are (and most importantly I am) clean..." The scent, the whiff of something off, was going to kill his brand.

I also agree with both points raised here, well, minus the "not the end/just the beginning" bit. I think Polnut absolutely hits the nail on the head, that he has made such a stand on integrity, made it his number one issue, he really needed to put his money where his mouth is when confronted with lying under oath.


I suspect he forgot because delegations from all over bring gifts to meetings with Ministers, Premiers, Prime Ministers, even meetings with backbenchers. They do receive a fair number of gifts, and I don't think it completely unreasonable to forget it - we found a bottle of wine in our wine rack on the weekend, which was very clearly a gift, and I have absolutely no idea from whom I received it nor when (Grange, I'd probably remember, but then again, perhaps Grange isn't as big a deal to someone who has reached the top of state politics). Anyway, this is the reason we have a Register of Members' Interests in all Parliaments across Australia - to avoid gifts being used as bribes, it's harder to do that if you have to declare gifts.

Members do forget (occasionally) to enter something into the Register. They normally add it on at a later date, when they realise, and make a very brief statement to Parliament in which they apologise for the error. It's no big deal to occasionally forget to add something, at least, not if you remember to add it later.

Given that he received it as a "congratulatory gift" following the election, it doesn't strike me as odd to think he received probably a fair number of gifts and notes and the like at about that time, plus all the briefings to get him up to speed on forming government - that transitional period is very busy. I can completely understand why he may have forgotten receiving it.

I think he felt he could make such a strong statement, both to ICAC and to the media, because he checked his Pecuniary Interests forms beforehand - he was called to give evidence, not just for the sake of giving evidence, but because a previous witness testified that he'd sent this bottle of wine. I think that as soon as that witness's testimony was given, someone in the Premier's Office would have been checking the Register for that item, and not finding it. The Premier would have been fully briefed that it doesn't appear on the Register, and he would have prepared specifically for that question prior to giving evidence. Remember: the question didn't just pop up at a media conference, or when a journalist asked to follow up a lead - he wouldn't have needed to say "I'll go and check my records" because he would already have done so. His failure here doesn't relate to not giving a tentative answer when he should have, the failure is in the record keeping.


I am most likely biased, and I do have a tendency to trust people and take them at their word - or at the very least, look for a way in which they aren't deliberately being untruthful, but maybe through a misunderstanding or through miscommunication may be attempting to be honest but mistakingly giving a false answer. I try to over-ride my biases when it comes to MPs caught out on issues in their personal lives (as opposed to policy - and I consider bribery and corruption a personal flaw, not a policy flaw) by trying to objectively ask myself how I'd respond if the MP was on the opposite side - if a criticism is levelled at a Liberal MP, I ask myself if I'd be defending their actions if they were a Labor MP, and if it's a Labor MP, I ask myself if I'd be criticising them if they were a Liberal. I may not actively criticise a Liberal/defend a Labor MP publicly, or here on the Forum, but I certainly would in private with close friends (and the absence of recording devices!!!). Indeed, there was a Labor MP criticised for something in the past twelve months, where I refused to comment on the allegations because I believed the MP's version of events, and in private I did comment on them because when people asked me what I thought, I thought it important to voice my opinion that I thought the MP was being a bit hard-done-by (for reference, I don't think anyone on here would even remember the MP/incident, it was in the paper for about a day or two before it died down).

Anyway, that said, I may be biased in this, but I honestly think O'Farrell has done nothing maliciously wrong. I certainly don't believe he acted corruptly: there is nothing wrong with accepting a bottle of wine, even a $3,000 bottle of wine (assuming it is declared). There is also nothing wrong with honestly forgetting to declare it (though there are very important reasons why it needs to be declared, especially when it's received from someone so caught up in corruption allegations - I don't think it's resign-worthy, though). I think he honestly had forgotten that he'd received the wine, that he checked to make sure, that he felt he could make these statements under oath and again to the media. I think that the mention of the phonecall and his look of horror was not that he'd failed to bury the evidence, but that moment when the penny dropped that obviously he had received it and that he was now in the position where his entire career was unravelling before his eyes. I feel terribly and utterly sorry for the man and I empathise with that punch to the guts he must have been feeling.

Having therefore lied under oath, even if unintentionally, although I think he may have been able to weather the storm (at a greatly reduced popularity in the polls), he really had to resign. I think most people would have tried going on, but I think O'Farrell knew the horrible decision he had to make and I think he followed his conscience and felt it was the only way he could maintain at least part of his integrity.

If further evidence comes out that he had, in fact, acted corruptly, I reserve my right to change my opinion of O'Farrell, but I honestly believe he did the right, honourable and noble thing in resigning, and that he did so at great personal cost, and I think that demonstrates the importance he places in his own integrity.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1264 on: April 16, 2014, 08:29:55 PM »

Reports that Baird will be the next Premier.

Yep, he and Berejiklian apparently met last night and this morning and decided that (despite her probably having slightly more support) and close leadership ballot was not in the interests of the party.

Update: Joint statement released - Baird to run for Leader and Berejiklian to run for Deputy.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1265 on: April 16, 2014, 08:38:53 PM »

I suspect this was a genuine mistake on his part, rather than a deliberate lie, however lying under oath is lying under oath, and that's what's brought him down - not that he accepted a bottle of wine. I suspect he won't have the book thrown at him, perhaps a plea bargain, or even if not, a not especially heavy sentence.

I hope it was a genuine mistake too. As you said though, lying under oath is lying under oath.

Again... I'm conflicted. The general view is... how the hell do you forget receiving a bottle of Grange, let alone one that is that rare and valuable AND writing a thank you note, to someone that you're in fairy regular contact with?

That's the part that bothers me... it just makes so little sense. Plus, if he was unsure... why make such a strong and clear denial? 'I'm not 100% sure, please let me check records so I can be accurate in my testimony' - the media wouldn't like it... but it at least would be accurate. The look of horror on his face when the phone record was produced last night ... was special.

So, part of me thinks he either genuinely forgot (which I find odd and little disturbing) or he oversold his denial thinking he could get away with it.

I agree with almost all of this (I think it can make a bit more sense, and that there may be a reason he felt he didn't need to check records before responding, but I'll come back to that). I have also heard the look on his face was something to behold - but I think it was due to a high level of stress at realising he'd completely painted himself into a corner with strong denials that have turned out to be untrue. I still think it was mistake, rather than malicious, but regardless, he realised he'd made very strong denials and evidence has come out that they are untrue. I can understand a look of horror.

Not only is it a weird thing to lie over, it doesn't feel like it's resignation material. Very good chance that this isn't the end of it. Could just be the beginning.

I do understand... when you've spent the last what? 5-7 years running around saying "they're corrupt, we are (and most importantly I am) clean..." The scent, the whiff of something off, was going to kill his brand.

I also agree with both points raised here, well, minus the "not the end/just the beginning" bit. I think Polnut absolutely hits the nail on the head, that he has made such a stand on integrity, made it his number one issue, he really needed to put his money where his mouth is when confronted with lying under oath.


I suspect he forgot because delegations from all over bring gifts to meetings with Ministers, Premiers, Prime Ministers, even meetings with backbenchers. They do receive a fair number of gifts, and I don't think it completely unreasonable to forget it - we found a bottle of wine in our wine rack on the weekend, which was very clearly a gift, and I have absolutely no idea from whom I received it nor when (Grange, I'd probably remember, but then again, perhaps Grange isn't as big a deal to someone who has reached the top of state politics). Anyway, this is the reason we have a Register of Members' Interests in all Parliaments across Australia - to avoid gifts being used as bribes, it's harder to do that if you have to declare gifts.

Members do forget (occasionally) to enter something into the Register. They normally add it on at a later date, when they realise, and make a very brief statement to Parliament in which they apologise for the error. It's no big deal to occasionally forget to add something, at least, not if you remember to add it later.

Given that he received it as a "congratulatory gift" following the election, it doesn't strike me as odd to think he received probably a fair number of gifts and notes and the like at about that time, plus all the briefings to get him up to speed on forming government - that transitional period is very busy. I can completely understand why he may have forgotten receiving it.

I think he felt he could make such a strong statement, both to ICAC and to the media, because he checked his Pecuniary Interests forms beforehand - he was called to give evidence, not just for the sake of giving evidence, but because a previous witness testified that he'd sent this bottle of wine. I think that as soon as that witness's testimony was given, someone in the Premier's Office would have been checking the Register for that item, and not finding it. The Premier would have been fully briefed that it doesn't appear on the Register, and he would have prepared specifically for that question prior to giving evidence. Remember: the question didn't just pop up at a media conference, or when a journalist asked to follow up a lead - he wouldn't have needed to say "I'll go and check my records" because he would already have done so. His failure here doesn't relate to not giving a tentative answer when he should have, the failure is in the record keeping.


I am most likely biased, and I do have a tendency to trust people and take them at their word - or at the very least, look for a way in which they aren't deliberately being untruthful, but maybe through a misunderstanding or through miscommunication may be attempting to be honest but mistakingly giving a false answer. I try to over-ride my biases when it comes to MPs caught out on issues in their personal lives (as opposed to policy - and I consider bribery and corruption a personal flaw, not a policy flaw) by trying to objectively ask myself how I'd respond if the MP was on the opposite side - if a criticism is levelled at a Liberal MP, I ask myself if I'd be defending their actions if they were a Labor MP, and if it's a Labor MP, I ask myself if I'd be criticising them if they were a Liberal. I may not actively criticise a Liberal/defend a Labor MP publicly, or here on the Forum, but I certainly would in private with close friends (and the absence of recording devices!!!). Indeed, there was a Labor MP criticised for something in the past twelve months, where I refused to comment on the allegations because I believed the MP's version of events, and in private I did comment on them because when people asked me what I thought, I thought it important to voice my opinion that I thought the MP was being a bit hard-done-by (for reference, I don't think anyone on here would even remember the MP/incident, it was in the paper for about a day or two before it died down).

Anyway, that said, I may be biased in this, but I honestly think O'Farrell has done nothing maliciously wrong. I certainly don't believe he acted corruptly: there is nothing wrong with accepting a bottle of wine, even a $3,000 bottle of wine (assuming it is declared). There is also nothing wrong with honestly forgetting to declare it (though there are very important reasons why it needs to be declared, especially when it's received from someone so caught up in corruption allegations - I don't think it's resign-worthy, though). I think he honestly had forgotten that he'd received the wine, that he checked to make sure, that he felt he could make these statements under oath and again to the media. I think that the mention of the phonecall and his look of horror was not that he'd failed to bury the evidence, but that moment when the penny dropped that obviously he had received it and that he was now in the position where his entire career was unravelling before his eyes. I feel terribly and utterly sorry for the man and I empathise with that punch to the guts he must have been feeling.

Having therefore lied under oath, even if unintentionally, although I think he may have been able to weather the storm (at a greatly reduced popularity in the polls), he really had to resign. I think most people would have tried going on, but I think O'Farrell knew the horrible decision he had to make and I think he followed his conscience and felt it was the only way he could maintain at least part of his integrity.

If further evidence comes out that he had, in fact, acted corruptly, I reserve my right to change my opinion of O'Farrell, but I honestly believe he did the right, honourable and noble thing in resigning, and that he did so at great personal cost, and I think that demonstrates the importance he places in his own integrity.

FTR - I pretty much agree with this (even though it started with you agreeing with me Wink) - I certainly see nothing malicious in this at all, at least not the degree of maliciousness you'd normally expect.

It's possible he didn't remember, but his biggest single mistake was to make a clear statement that it didn't happen - because both require you to KNOW for sure.

I'm no expert in O'Farrell, he's the cousin of a friend of mine and I've met him a few times, he's a genuinely nice guy and normally very politically skilled. However, my view is that instead of saying his didn't remember, he said it never happened, trying to make the issue go away - again, because he KNEW the consequences of anything vaguely to do with corruption being anywhere near him - so he overshot the mark and brought it all down on himself.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1266 on: April 16, 2014, 11:37:12 PM »
« Edited: April 17, 2014, 12:19:39 AM by Fmr. President & Senator Polnut »

And the right of the NSW Libs are furious about the deal between Baird and Berejiklian for the leadership... since they're both moderates.

Will be interesting to see if there's a right-wing ticket that runs purely out of spite.

Edit: Baird and Berejiklian elected unopposed
Logged
BaconBacon96
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,678
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1267 on: April 17, 2014, 04:32:23 PM »

Actually, Baird is a member of the right-wing faction. He's also a social conservative and devout Christian.

You maybe confusing him with his moderate father, Bruce Baird.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,621
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1268 on: April 17, 2014, 07:00:53 PM »

Actually, Baird is a member of the right-wing faction. He's also a social conservative and devout Christian.

You maybe confusing him with his moderate father, Bruce Baird.
All the media seems to suggest that he's in the Left....

You are correct that he is a SoCon, though.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1269 on: April 17, 2014, 09:26:28 PM »

Actually, Baird is a member of the right-wing faction. He's also a social conservative and devout Christian.

You maybe confusing him with his moderate father, Bruce Baird.
All the media seems to suggest that he's in the Left....

You are correct that he is a SoCon, though.


Actually, he's still considered to be part of the moderate wing, which says a lot. He certainly has some strong conservative credentials.
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,509
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1270 on: April 20, 2014, 12:44:24 AM »

With the election in Victoria scheduled (for now) in November, how is it looking?  Will the Liberals there hold on, or will Labor be able to regain power? 
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1271 on: April 20, 2014, 01:20:31 AM »

With the election in Victoria scheduled (for now) in November, how is it looking?  Will the Liberals there hold on, or will Labor be able to regain power? 

It's been a while since the Libs have led in the polls. I believe the Government will lose, but to me, it'll come down to who has the better marginal seat campaign.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1272 on: April 20, 2014, 02:31:42 AM »
« Edited: April 20, 2014, 02:41:57 AM by MaxQue »

Last poll having Liberals leading was in June 2013.

However, the Labor has an issue with retiring MLAs. Labor has 8, Coalition has 6.
5 of the retiring Labor MLAs are in marginal seats (Oakleigh, Macedon, Ripon, Essendon and Geelong), the three safe ones being Yuroke, Pascoe Vale and Dandenong. All coalition seats with retiring MLAs are safe or ultra-safe (Bulleen, Kew and Bass for the Liberals, Lowan, Shepparton and Benalla for the Nationals).
Logged
Hifly
hifly15
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,937


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1273 on: April 20, 2014, 03:14:45 AM »

Labor may have effectively already lost Macedon by parachuting in an outsider left wing candidate who doesn't have any support in the local branches (90% of local members signed a petition against her and sent it off to the admin. committee) and they're refusing to campaign for her.
Logged
MaxQue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,600
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1274 on: April 20, 2014, 04:06:40 AM »

Labor may have effectively already lost Macedon by parachuting in an outsider left wing candidate who doesn't have any support in the local branches (90% of local members signed a petition against her and sent it off to the admin. committee) and they're refusing to campaign for her.

The issue isn't than the candidate is left-wing. It's than the left and right factions divide the seats between them and the candidate than the local branch selected belongs is opposed to factions. So, both factions opposed it. It's more a pro-factions/pro-members fight.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 46 47 48 49 50 [51] 52 53 54 55 56 ... 96  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.083 seconds with 13 queries.