Arjay Martin
              ............................................................

Arjay wants to hear from you

     --------------------------------------------------

Various Articles on 2012 Candidates #2

N. B.  These are as they appeared in the articles - either Edited by Editors or otherwise.

What are your thoughts?  Use the Contact form on this website to let me know.


My comments are in Italics - some comments will be larger, some smaller, just to mix things up a bit. 

___________________________________________________________________

For ease of reading, my comments also appear here:


This was not a good idea, even if the Candidate was late / 'in transit', or whatever it would have been good to give much more notice.

----

This is a 'beat-up' / 'bluff' - just like Matthew Morris lied about me, in terms of Preferences, etc. for the Charlestown State Election (NBN News) I had no recourse but to try to hire a lawyer (sue for Libel / Defamation).  The equivalent applies to Council and Federal Government Elections.  The Labor Party knows that the "False and Misleading Information" as it is called in the story - relates in How to Cast a Vote - e.g. if the pamphlet looks like it is from a different group than it is, a Party Preferences (in the suggestion of 'how to vote') a different person than their own Candidate first, that it says to cross or tick a box, that it doesn't put numbers in each box, changes Ballot Order, etc.  From memory - at the last Federal Election, or the previous one, the Liberals and Labor both put the Greens as their Number 2 (vote get a Green Elected in place of the main 'adversary').


From the AEC Electoral Backgrounder - Electoral Advertising, July 2013:
48. the intention of subsection 329(1) is not to regulate the content of political messages directed at influencing the choice of preferred candidates or political parties by voters but to regulate publications and broadcasts that are directed at influencing the way in which the ballot paper is actually marked. this distinction was upheld by the High court in Evans v Crichton‑Browne (1981) 147 clr 169, the leading case on subsection 329(1).

49. in this case the provision in question was section 161, the relevant part of which is now contained in subsection 329(1), so that the 

following conclusion of the court is equally applicable to subsection 329(1) as it stands today: the words in section 161(e) ‘in or in  relation to the casting of his vote’ refer to the act of recording or expressing the elector’s political judgment, for example, in obtaining and marking a ballot paper and depositing it in the ballot box, and not to the formation of that judgment.

50. this means that the aEc has no role or responsibility in handling complaints about allegedly untrue statements in published or 

broadcast electoral advertisements that are intended to influence the judgment of voters about who they should vote for. complaints that do fall within the scope of subsection 329(1) are those that relate to electoral publications, broadcasts, internet or telephone messages that are likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the way the ballot paper is marked.

----
There are many problems with dirty tricks for Elections it appears - they seem to be discovered and repeated a lot more in say the United States of America, I suppose that it is the due to them not having Compulsory Voting there, and also that a higher proportion of people seem to be interested in Political Issues.


This was not a good idea, even if the Candidate was late / 'in transit', or whatever it would have been good to give much more notice.


Daily Mercury, Ian Ferguson too busy to chat to the people of Dawson

Pamela Frost, 26th Aug 2013

UPDATE:

IS this a sign of things to come if he does the impossible and wins the seat of Dawson?

Less than 15 minutes before a live chat online at dailymercury.com.au Palmer United Party candidate Ian Ferguson has cancelled.  This is despite being committed to the chat for two weeks.


A spokesperson for Mr Ferguson rang the Daily Mercury a few moments ago to break the news that Mr Ferguson will not be taking part in the live chat because 'he is currently in transit'.  "He does have commitments with the Palmer United Party launch today and he obviously doesn't have any control over what the party has organised for him," the spokeswoman said.


Tomorrow Katter's Australia Party candidate Justin Englert will take your questions from 11am-Noon and Labor candidate for Dawson Bronwyn Taha between 2pm and 3pm.


EARLIER:

NO MATTER where they are today, Mackay voters will be able to personally pick the brain of Palmer United Party candidate for Dawson Ian Ferguson.  All you need is a computer and access to the internet.


Today the Daily Mercury will kick off our live chats with the Federal election candidates for Dawson, starting with Mr Ferguson today from 11am to noon.  It's your chance to get those burning questions answered before you head to the polls on September 7.


Tomorrow Katter's Australia Party candidate Justin Englert will take your questions from 11am-Noon and Labor candidate for Dawson Bronwyn Taha between 2pm and 3pm.  Other candidates will take part in chats later in the week.


http://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/ferguson-online-to-answer-queries/1997050/

__________________________________


This is a 'beat-up' / 'bluff' - just like Matthew Morris lied about me, in terms of Preferences, etc. for the Charlestown State Election (NBN News) I had no recourse but to try to hire a lawyer (sue for Libel / Defamation).  The equivalent applies to Council and Federal Government Elections.  The Labor Party knows that the "False and Misleading Information" as it is called in the story - relates in How to Cast a Vote - e.g. if the pamphlet looks like it is from a different group than it is, a Party Preferences (in the suggestion of 'how to vote') a different person than their own Candidate first, that it says to cross or tick a box, that it doesn't put numbers in each box, changes Ballot Order, etc.  From memory - at the last Federal Election, or the previous one, the Liberals and Labor both put the Greens as their Number 2 (vote get a Green Elected in place of the main 'adversary').


From the AEC Electoral Backgrounder - Electoral Advertising, July 2013:
48. the intention of subsection 329(1) is not to regulate the content of political messages directed at influencing the choice of preferred candidates or political parties by voters but to regulate publications and broadcasts that are directed at influencing the way in which the ballot paper is actually marked. this distinction was upheld by the High court in Evans v Crichton‑Browne (1981) 147 clr 169, the leading case on subsection 329(1).

49. in this case the provision in question was section 161, the relevant part of which is now contained in subsection 329(1), so that the 

following conclusion of the court is equally applicable to subsection 329(1) as it stands today: the words in section 161(e) ‘in or in  relation to the casting of his vote’ refer to the act of recording or expressing the elector’s political judgment, for example, in obtaining and marking a ballot paper and depositing it in the ballot box, and not to the formation of that judgment.

50. this means that the aEc has no role or responsibility in handling complaints about allegedly untrue statements in published or 

broadcast electoral advertisements that are intended to influence the judgment of voters about who they should vote for. complaints that do fall within the scope of subsection 329(1) are those that relate to electoral publications, broadcasts, internet or telephone messages that are likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the way the ballot paper is marked.


The Age, Labor threatens action over Adam Bandt's 'false' claims

Richard Willingham, August 26, 2013

Mud continues to be thrown in the battle for the seat of Melbourne, with the ALP threatening to take Greens MP Adam Bandt to the electoral commission for "false and misleading information".  Labor vice-president and state MP, Jane Garrett, says the party is considering taking Mr Bandt to the AEC over a letter he wrote to the electorate accusing the ALP of doing a preference swap with the Liberal Party.  The Greens say the threat is an example of how desperate the ALP is becoming in the election.

Mr Bandt recently wrote: "It's no wonder that here in Melbourne, according to The Age, Labor and Tony Abbott have worked on a preference deal in an attempt to lock the Greens out of the Parliament."

Ms Garrett said it was an appalling display from the Greens, saying the party was making things up in an attempt to save his political skin.


"The ALP is investigating options including referring the matter to the Australian Electoral Commission on the grounds of false and misleading material," Ms Garrett said.


"It comes in a long line of dodgy claims from Adam Bandt, including claiming credit for the NDIS and education reforms, making these false claims from a party that has done a preference deal with Clive Palmer's coal party demonstrates an air of desperation."

Mr Bandt said the statement was a desperate last-minute attempt to distract from their preference deal with the Liberals.


"Senior Labor MP Michael Danby's statements as far back as 2011 have been crystal clear, offering to preference the Liberals above the Greens in Melbourne Ports if the Liberals preferenced Labor in Melbourne, and that is exactly what has happened. It's hard to imagine a clearer example of an agreement," Mr Bandt said.


"Labor is also preferencing the Liberals in Mallee as was predicted by The Age when it reported on the Labor-Liberal preference deal earlier in the year."


http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2013/labor-threatens-action-over-adam-bandts-false-claims-20130826-2slb9.html#ixzz2d3zpby8Y 
 _________________________________

There are many problems with dirty tricks for Elections it appears - they seem to be discovered and repeated a lot more in say the United States of America, I suppose that it is the due to them not having Compulsory Voting there, and also that a higher proportion of people seem to be interested in Political Issues.


From Facebook:

24 August, Suzanne Campion Crawford > Liberal National Chat Page

I was in the zone myself yesterday, helping out Dr Bill Glasson's Campaign at the Griffith polling booth in Turbo Drive Coorparooo when an Council Officer arrived in a large high visibility Rapid Response vehicle and directed me to remove the sign from my windscreen as it was breaking the law. 

The officer then proceeded with what could be described as stand over tactics and legal threats. 

Upon hearing from me that I was not aware of any law I had broken he retrieved from his vehicle the Rule Book. 

Accusing me of breaking at least three rules, none of which appeared to be close to anything I could plead guilty to, he then directed that he would stand over me until I removed the sign. 

Following my refusal to do so until it was proven to me that there was a real problem with my action, he then threatened me with a phone call from the City Council’s Head Solicitor. The entire incident went on over an hour. 

Does Local Authority employ its Officers to use such tactics with members of the Public?

Is this the usual occupation of this Council Officer? 

Do these Inspectors act at the behest of a Trade Union or their Employer? 

I realize who made the complaint. It would appear obvious. (See Pic attached of ALP Rudd supporter colluding with the man).

Do Inspectors make a habit of intimidation and making up their own rules on the spot?

How much did this incident cost BCC ratepayers?

 _________________________________