The North West Central By-Election

So as I type the Nationals look to be retaining the seat of North West Central that Vince Catania had held since 2008.
Some Vince Catania background. He was no stranger to politics before he even ran for Parliament. He is the son of Nick Catania who held the seat of Balcatta from 1989 to 1996. So Vince was a mere 19 years old when his father Nick retired from politics. 

Vince won in the Mining & Pastoral Seat (Upper House) in 2005 aged 28, at the time making him the youngest to sit in the Legislative Assemby. 3 years in 2008 later he switched to the Lower House, was preselected & won the North West Central seat for the WALabor party.
In 2009 he left the WALabor Party & wikipedia states "He cited dissatisfaction with Eric Ripper, the Labor leader, and concerns that Labor had become too "city-centric"

That's not the important point, the real thing here is what happens if you leave the ALP as an MP taking the seat with you. Be aware you cannot represent your electorate in Parliament if you're in the Labor Party. In fact you can only vote in the best interests of your electorate IF the Party room decides to gift you, on very rare ocassions a conscience vote. If you otherwise cross the floor you will be expelled from the party & targeted. Even in the very rare cases where a conscience vote is gifted a Labor MP would have to consider very careful the implications that will come anyway if they cross the floor. In the case of the Euthanasia Bill where the Premier with his massive lower house majority passed it through in record time & said publicly it needed no amendments, Labor MP Adele Farina exercised her gifted Conscience Vote and moved many amendments to the bill. 55 all up were passed & she moved quite a few. She was them pushed out in the subsequent election to an unwinnable spot on the ticket. This was a clear message to all MPs, stay in your lane, obey your party room or you go under the bus.

That's the Standard Operating Procedure and then there's hideous acts with horrible things sent through the mail to MPs who do the right thing...not sure if that's what Adele Farina copped but others have.

So leaving the ALP like Vince Catania did was no mean feat. Ian Blayney was the Liberal member for the Liberal Party & he left the Liberals whilst in office & joined the WANationals too. Now would not have been smooth sailing with great glasses of fine wine amongst his new ex-colleagues either, but there weren't attacks, abuse or dead things in the mail.

Since winning the seat & then changing parties Vince Catania would lose the seat. No.
In fact he held the seat of North West Central till he retired this year.

Here's the thing, primary vote, Vince trailed the WALabor candidate by 39 votes.
With preferences allocated & counted Vince won the seat by 259 votes.
Liberal Party didn't come close.

Deeper context, Labor in 2021 Election picked up a 27.14% swing. That is a massive gain, massive to the point of staggering...and yet they did not bother to run anyone in the North West Central election. 

Vince however picked up a 4.46% positive swing. In an election where very few non ALP lower house seats were retained or won, Vince actually picked up a positive swing & held off a Tsunami of a swing to Labor.

Even during the biggest WALabor Electoral Landslide topped with Tsunami...The WALabor Party still couldn't beat Vince Catania. He still won his seat. In an electorate that covers in excess of 820,000 square kilometres. I was told Vince often does between 150,000 & 200,000 kilometres a year in his electorate. 

So why did WALabor not run a candidate this by-election. Possibly for the same reason Vince Catania is said to have left the WALabor Party. They're too city centric.
They have the majority of Lower House seats & if they had contested it, it would have been their cleanskin candidate against other cleanskin candidates. All people who've never served in the Parliament. It would have been very level pegging but if WALabor's 2021 candidate had run again.

But guess what, she was keen to, but she was denied the chance. Here were her comments in June 2022

Nyikina and Bardi woman Cherie Sibosado says she is seeking Labor party endorsement to recontest the seat of North West Central.

“In the event that I get an opportunity to be considered I definitely am keen to put my hand up but I don’t have any decision making power at this stage,” she said. “But following the announcement by the incumbent member, there’s a lot of hype and buzz around it so an opportunity’s presenting. So we’ll just wait and see.” So sadly this Indigenous woman ended up being denied the opportunity to run. But why? Well she missed out by 259 votes. Had she done any worse than that then many would point to the shine coming off the WALabor Government. If the other candidates picked up a tiny swing its a poor result for the McGowan Government report card. Their best strategic play was dumped the candidate who picked up a 27.14% swing, not because she had no chance of winning but the chance she she might pick up a negative swing in marginal seat. Anything negative reflects on the WA Premier, the WA Cabinet & the WALabor Government. There was risk and damage with every choice but the tactical choice they took was to run no one, cop some flak at the announcement for a day or two, then relax. Exactly what happened. So to voters in North West Central...to WALabor YOU DON'T MATTER, YOU WERE A POTENTIAL THREAT TO WALABOR & YOU PROVIDE NO BENEFIT TO THE WALABOR PARTY. YOU GO UNDER THE BUS, YOU DO NOT NEED A VOICE WITHIN THE ELECTED GOVERNMENT, YOU DON'T RATE, YOU DON'T MATTER. The stark honesty is Vince Catania left the WALabor Party because the Party had become to City Centric & 13 years later Vince is still right. 13 years later and not even contesting the by-election, WALabor could not defeat Vince Catania. The WALabor Party widely well known for controlling the Press Optic with highly stage managed Press Conferences we see again, they dropped out of the contest to lessen the negative impact & take the least damaging optic. What will change in Parliament? Not a lot. Nationals have retained the seat but now have a brand new, inexperienced MP instead of a well known MP one with 13 years experience in the electorate. Merome (Mem) Beard will have the thrown-in-deep-end harsh baptism but that hard, blunt & rather massive leaning curve may well serve her well. It may well harden & temper her fast into being a good local member & a good legislator. She put her hand up which is more than the willing Cherie Sibosado was allowed to do. With some luck she may now consider what sort of city centric, controlling with over reach party she is a member of. Maybe she might see the light and join another party unafraid of running a willing person. Maybe...

If the Political System and the Bureaucracy Needs Reform. Who Brings That In?

This Simple.

a) Both the Political System AND the Bureaucracy Need A Drastic Overhaul To Provide Actual Outcomes 

b) Who Brings That In? Simple. The elected Members of Parliament. That's why they're elected. To represent us.

What is the obvious problem? Again SIMPLE.
There appears to be an accepted method of doing business in the political realm & the public service. The priority is activity not outcome. If Yes Minister wasn't a comedy we'd see irony but if there was any irony its that Yes Minister's writers relied very heavily on covert advice from people who were at the time deeply embedded in the UK Bureaucracy. It was so funny because not solely because it was so absurd but because it was based so deeply, accurately on truth.
Good comedy was based on truth. Those who've been involved with Not For Profit groups, landcare groups, community groups who were working regularly with grant applications and government help...Yes Minister/Yes Prime Minister & Australia's The Hollowmen, Utopia were often looked upon as very nearly being documentaries.

Activity not Outcomes was the norm. When outcomes happened they were overly lauded as tremendous feats of daring that they were near on among the Wonders of the Modern World.

Now if you want to be shocked & jaw slacked over the codifying  by some of bizarre Yes Ministery as a normal nothing to see here normal event click on this link & listen closely at one Community Sporting group that recieved a sizeable grant but 4 years on still not a single copper coin has hit the project. As a result with the massive rise in costs they will have to revise their plan (if they ever get the grant money) & pair back costs between 25-40%.

Add to that, this grant along with many others were questioned & went through a long review process to check all was Kosher. As I understand it has been determined ok & yet on the Interview between Liam Bartlett on 6PR and federal Labor MP Patrick Gorman, he, Patrick Gorman used the words "rorted payments" and yet we do not know what the actual alleged "rort" is.

Over 100 days over Federal ALP Government & Mr Gorman the responsible Federal Assiistant Minister & the local member for the electorate that club is in. There is now yet another process in place, former government blamed. No outcome outlined "until the budget".

Click here to hear the debacle. 

https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/mornings-with-liam-bartlett-full-show-16-september-2022/id1231321581?i=1000579646821 

Now the problem remains. We need a full wide ranging review & reform of the Public Service and the Political Structure to ensure there is proper due process but efficient service to the public.

It props up more questions, who are the enablers in the non process of "wheels of government?
Is it the MPs or the Bureacrats?

In forming legislation, who is putting bills forward & who is doing the veto edit because it does

Peter - "I just get sick of politicians. They keep telling me how busy they are and not how much they've got done and how its the previous people's fault. When are they going to put a magnifying glass over the bureaucracy and start a wide ranging reform of government departments? I'm not sure who's at fault. Who is it? Who are the enablers, is it the MPs or the Bureaucrats or both? Its obvious Sir Humphrey & Jim Hacker moved to Australia"

Liam Bartlett - "Peter, seriously, how much time do you have to have or take to be able to resolve something like this? When you get the 2 key people and the local member, convene a meeting, sit around a table and say 'Right what needs to be done, what action needs to be taken, what, is there a problem, if so what is it?' how hard is it?"

Peter - " Well um well look over there, at the end of the day, that's a shiny squirrel over there and my pronouns are x, y & z and we'll focus on that to keep you distracted"

The following question caller "Gabriel" said he was involved in the process & there was no more process because the process was done, that Senator Dean Smith had photos taken in front of the club because the project was a done deal & was only awaiting the signature of Barnaby Joyce. That there was no more process. It'd taken 4 years (too long for my mind) because it had been prudent. Senator Jones led and investiagtion into the club to ensure prudence. The club handed the grant over the City of Vincent to ensure prudence, to provide satisfaction to the Department of Infrastructure. He also claimed Senator Smith need to stand up for what he said he committed & alleged Patrick Gorman is a "dead set liar"

What is due process according to Patrick Gorman?
What is due process according to Senator Dean Smith?
What is due process according to the Dept of Infrastructure?
What is the hold up?
Is a political party taking too long or is a political party looking for a political advantage by claiming rorted payments?
What is the rort?

Patrick Gorman is the member for Perth & the Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister & he made the comment in the interview that what they're doing on a range of unresolved grants to sporting clubs...but didn't say what they're doing, got done but should be done by the next Budget. 
He also asked why the previous government didn't "push the money out" before the election when it remains unanswered why he hasn't pushed the money out 100+ days since the election. Is it the politicians who push the money out & if so, why has the new Labor government not pushed the money since the election if Mr Gorman is critical it wasn't pushed out by the coalition before the election & then claims he doesn't want to get political.
Club president doesn't know of question marks. Mr Gorman says it must go thru the process but doesn't outline what process is outstanding & unfinished since he came to power or prior to the election. He pointed briefly to the Dept & said they make seek to talk there if & when appropriate but it won't be resoleved until the Budget on the 25th of October.

Its not that the Bureaucracy needs to be cut through or side stepped...THE BUREAUCRACY & ITS PROCESSES NEED A WIDE RANGING REFORM, POSSIBLY A WIDE RANGING ROYAL COMMISSION INTO DEPARTMENTAL PROCESSES IMPEDING EFFCICIENCIES AND SERVICE DELIVERY TO THE PUBLIC.

Repeat the time is now announcing and inquiry because...

THE BUREAUCRACY & ITS PROCESSES NEED A WIDE RANGING REFORM, POSSIBLY A WIDE RANGING ROYAL COMMISSION INTO DEPARTMENTAL PROCESSES IMPEDING EFFCICIENCIES AND SERVICE DELIVERY TO THE PUBLIC.

Mr Gorman's closing comments included "There are projects in my electorate that ahh did not go through due process. I don't want people to recieve that sort of umm rorted payments..."

So here's the biggies...the easy, easy easy reasonable fixes.
Yes, its simple.
If the Federal Government is serious about integrity...Bring on a full & wide ranging inquiry to guide wide ranging reforms to balance due process with effiecient delivery of service & grant money. 

The reforms also have to include full end of year report cards on the Departments & the Ministers with openly accessible to the public in depth metrics on delivery & due diligence milestones missed or made & clearly identify the names of the actuall who are responsible and all who comitted a breach or over reach.

Leaving The Monarchy, Yes or No?

The poor lady. Elizabeth the Great, potentially the greatest monarch in British history & she wasn't even laid to rest and people came out of the woodwork wanting the Republican debate raised. I give 100% full credit to the Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. He is an actual Socialist, a pro Republican stalwart yet he had the decency to say very clearly within hours of her passing that this is not the time to speak on such matters. Add to that upon taking office & organising his cabinet he added the Hon. Matt Thistlethwaite MP in an outer cabinet position "Assistant Minister for the Republic" *(1)

Within hours of the Queen's passing the calls from a loud minority was launched and it was a minority with the Republican friends of mine very unimpressed. Everyone one of them said first it was highly disrespectful & would actually work against a Republican Referendum even if it waited until after Mr ALbanese's first term. I think think it wasn't coming from the genuine Australian first & foremost citizens but some of the more, well agitator types. Irrespective, very disrespectful.

Mr Albanese had to say that a Republican referendum would not happen in his first term as Prime Minister. That next election will happen sometime in 2025 or just before and they have a so far badly handled Referendum for a Voice to Parliament *(2)

But when there are calls to replace the Head of State it's interesting how little some people know or are aware of in their haste to be part of what some see as a very historic change to Australian life. 

"We shouldn't have a mega rich aristocrat ruling us, it's an embarassment"
Strangely we are not ruked by the British monarch. They are the representative Head of State, they are the living symbol of the process & all its protective layers to ensure a free society. The Queen did not rule the UK or the Commonwealth. She was a Constitutional Monarch & therefore could not interfere in the political & social life of the nation even though she was a part of the structure of the nation's political & social life.
She could not over rule the executive, the parliament or the judiciary. She was a ceremonial head of state.
Being a citizen of the UK, she was either further removed from Australian political life.

A republic would likely have to have a President & that person would have to be elected by the people or by the Parliament. The latter gives you a job for the favoured few whilst the former gives you a popularity contest where a celebrity, entertainer or sports star could get the spot. President Jimmy Barnes sound like a great idea? He is very well known as aligning with Greens, Labor & the Left. I'd prefer to see someone with a longer track record of good, its not about finding that perfect person, its finding that person who shows a life of duty & service to the people as the Queen was. Good luck keeping out career politicians and factional mates pulling the big gig when we want someone seperated from party lines.
Elizabeth the Great & now King Charles ticks those boxes and in general the Governor General of Australia is the face of the Ceremonial Monarch. To a lesser extent in the state level, the State Governors

Embarassment? No, no one cares. The most embarassed are those who don't understand the system, the structure, the protocols and have a very very strong desire to rip down a part of the institution.

"Its better we have an Australian as our head of state not a foreigner"
Well part of this is above but pivotal moment is what is "better", what does it change.
What are the somehow assured improvements?

The downside is every single Government Department both state, federal & local would undergo a completely make over, all logos, badges, letterheads & refereences all has to change. The currency will have to change, every single coin & every $5 note that bears the Queens image. I was told they have to change now so it's best to go referendum now & change all the currency now and change it once. I pointed out that whilst the effiagy of King Charles will go onto the coins from now on, they will not be recalling all currency. We only have one possible two more circulating coin releases this year depending on damage to older coins. All the coins will be slowly replaced as time goes on.

Coin collectors are have been speculating which coins would be phased out first, the 5c or the 50c 
In 2006 there were over 300 million 5c coins made & put into circulation. There have been 16 seperate years where over 100 million 5c coins were made & put into circulation since it was first made in 1966.

Right now the King Charles coins will be made, they will be made in smaller number and slowly replace the Queen Elizabeth II coins as they age & wear. Wish King Charles a long & happy life but he is 74. There will be a much smaller number of coins produced even if his reign goes for 22 years should he live to 96 like his mother. 
22 years ago there were over 30 million 20c produced & most are still in circulation. If Charles lives to 96 they will probably remove Elizabeth II coins are a greater rate than normal replacement rate but in any case, there will be less King coins than the Queen coins.
Its not as costly as a republic where all coins would have to be replaced within 5 or ten years.
Currency is not a reason.

At this stage I'll wait to hear what all the real tangible advantages are.
An Australian Head of State is not a real negative, but it's not a positive replacing a negative. It will be a symbolic change but will deliver potentially less removed/arms length "head of state transcendence"

I'll update this as I can find more actual advantages to the Nation, the society beyond changing the birthplace or citizenship of the Head of State. I was told they should be born in Australia.
That will remove every single immigrant citizen or anyone with potential dual citizenship like Federal MPs & Senators with the Section 44 (i) debacle. I'll wait...


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

*(1) The Hon. Matt Thistlethwaite MP left school in 1989. In 1990 he attended University of NSW to began a 4 year degree, Bachelor of Economics 
In 1995 he began work for the Australian Worker's Union. in 2001 he was elected State Deputy President of that Union. He was elected to the Australian Senate in 2010. When Peter Garrett departed the Lower House in 2013 Thistlewaite sought & gained preselection and won the seat of Randwick. In 2017 he was appointed as the first 'Shadow Assistant Minister for an Australian Head of State'.
He's been a Union Movement employee & player since 2001 (21 years) and in Parliament since 2010 (12 years). He is a career politician, nothing else.

*(2) It's odd that the Labor Government thought they'd have a Republic enough of a priority to create the assistant minister role for Mr Thistlewaite whilst also plan for the push to have a Referendum on the Indigenous Voice to Parliament. It's like they thought it would be smart to run two referendums in the one term, then changed their mind & only declared this term, one in the next. The Republic one must have been deemed the hardest to get passed with the death of the Queen. The was no indication or announcement that a Republic Referendum would not happen until a subsequent term of a Labor Government. It only came after Queen Elziabeth II's death. Its odd and we can only speculate but it does seem in hindsight they were possibly planning to run both the Voice to Parliament & The Republic referendums at the same time, 2 questions on the one ballot paper.
As it is, its been said by Prime Minister Albanese that the Voice to Parliament Referendum would be a simple "yes of no" with details to be worked out at a later date.
In other words the people will vote on a Voice to Parliament without any details of the powers, the structure or the funding model & cost. Originally it was said to be an Advisory Body but since we've heard some say that either ALL parliamentary bills will go before the Advisory Body and at other times all Bills relating to Indigenous People. 
The need for The Voice? Not sure, not sure what it is or how it works so we can't be sure of the non existing need it might provide.
At present though, please note that the Hon Linda Burney MP is the Minister for Indigenous Australians & that Senator Malarndirri McCarthy is the Assistant Minister for Indigenous Australians & the Assistant Minister for Indigenous Health. They have quite a devoted Voice now & its very much based in seperating Indigenous & non Indigenous Australians or...or perhaps the Department of Health is not helping Indigneous people at all.

When good emotions are used badly...

That titled doesn't even make sense...or does it. Test it.

Recently in Albany there's a small group of people, lets call them protestors that set up outside the town hall with placards. Its a busty intersection, I guess it's a good spot to be if you're appealing to traffic. They're normal looking people, nice quite normal, they behave quite normal & the cause no problems, not even to the traffic. 

What are they protesting? Largely refugees. I don't have a problem with refugees but I think their protest is flawed in the way they're doing it & the clarity of what exactly it is they actually want or hope to achieve. I am going to have to pull over, walk back & chat with them to check at some stage but going but going by the placards they're committing a few fails.

One has honk if you support refugees. Now they jiggle & wave the sign like the Dominoes pizza guy on Tuesday afternoons. People spot movement & look. They wave, smile & cheer. That is seen as excited happiness and I have to say if they sign is jiggling and not easy to read still many might see excited people waving and only read "Honk if you're..." and they give them a toot. They might see the full message "Honk if you support refugees" and happy cheery people throwing friendly waves and wave back or toot.

It's not a compelling test of much except you can get some support for a very broad & ill defined notion.
You can get support on an emotion level there & then. You can't argue with a sign that says "Have Compassion Not Hate". How could you?
Not all the protestors are retirement age, but most are. There's a much younger fellow there, maybe 30s but of a pigtail. Looks fit & able bodied but mostly they're clean retirement age people. Pretty hard to see them & be repelled by these nice lookign overly happy people. Its usually a week day, I'm not in the street everyday but I'd guess I've seen them at once a week.

One sign says "Support Refugees" well few wouldn't. Another says "Permanent Visas for Overseas Refugees" whilst another mentions the word "empathy"...no who is so ugly they wouldn't support a cause linked to empathy?

And that's where the very bland, very vague "protest" slid off the pan for me & into the bin.
THAT ALREADY EXISTS.
Why would you protest for something that already exists?

Do you not know you subject well or does the vaguely worded noton give the impression that would be fair & if you're a good person, a happy person eager to honk, smile & wave to them you'd support them and their very reasonable sign/request they're suggesting we have? 

In regards the sign Permanent Visas For Overseas Refugees it exists NOW. There is a process.

1) To arrive in Australia as an overseas citiizen you require a visa

2) If you arrive without a visa & apply for "protection" have their claims assessed through the refugee status determination and complementary protection system that applies under the Migration Act.

Asylum Statistics are difficult at times, depending who you are & where you sit on refugees and views do vary. Many more apply than are granted but not recieving asylum doesn't automatically mean lack of empathy. They may not be people requiring protection.
Some are economic refugees just seeking a higher income and whilst that is not immoral, it's not really consistent with refugee status at all. 

When people leave their country & head to a nation for "safety" they would head to the nearest safe country where they won't be shipped back to danger. When a boat from the middle east or Sri Lanka heads to Australia, yes its in open water but it's passing many nations they could very easily settle in. But some are very discerning shoppers, they will head to the country with the best deal & the best deal has also been sold to them by the human traffickers who make a very good living of transporting refugees. And in Indonesia there have been refugee boats in harbour waiting for the weather & political weather to depart for Australia.

The people of Christmas Island said that when there's a change of government or a big drop in restrictions within a week they'd see a refugee boat when they'd gone over a year with none.

And yes, empathy. We do need to be empathetic & consider where new refugees, legitimate people under threat of death or harm, worthy of protection are going to actually be housed & how they are going to provide for themselves whilst they're here. Chances are they're going to require welfare until they are naturalised & can earn. 

We also need to consider the nature of a protection visa. Several families have recieved them & yet whilst being here for several years have flown back to their native country to visit family. I assume they're able to do so because they've gained Australian citizenship. But if their ancestoral nation is safe to visit, its safe to return to...unless its purely a financial decision.

I don't care what race, religion or creed a person in Australia is, but I think genuine applicants should recieve protection visas not discernign opportunists looking for a better higher income because it can come at a significant cost to Australia.

Its easy to honk if you (think you) have empathy but it's not a good discussion about the deeper parts to refugee visas. You don't have to think, you don't have to drill down into any complexity, you just side with the ones saying they're empathetic & suggesting there is no process when there is.

Thet've helped you side without thinking.

Currently in WA Politics

Its a real mess, in all parties, on all sides and as a result WE THE PEOPLE will pay the most. Some more than other others but benefits to the state, to the electorates will slide down.
The comment is often we have a tough arrogant government and a weak depleted opposition so we're in trouble & the real variance in the mix will be how much sugar is sprinkled on the optic as there's little or nothing the people can do but ride out the storm as best they can. That People Power is going to have little effect for quite some time, the Government will do what the Government wants & the Opposition cannot stop them. 

All correct but there is another thing that's often forgotten. 
The Pendulum.

The pendulum ALWAYS swings. It gets bad one way, it shifts and often swings too far the other way but it swings, it always does. Only thing that varies is the variation in the swing speed & the onluy real concern is how much damage is done between swings. At the moment it appears the duration of swing is great & the amount of damage isn't over & might determine how big a swing is coming.

The date of WA State Elections is set. Its 1 year, 6 months & 18 days until the next State Election on March 8th 2025. So we know when the pendulum will be apparent. And like share prices, the election results reflect the position on that past date. Yes there is a small opposition in Parliament, yes one Party controls both houses by an enormous majority, so much so they do not need many of their MPs to sit in the chamber. In fact the Labor Party MPs need only attend enough sittings to qualify for their salary. They need only attend one minute of sitting time on & not attend for months. I assume Labor MPs are many in whatever office rooms they can use doing other matters, with their chamber on the speakers in their room & they need but a small sprinkling of MPs in the actual chamber. In fact, go onto the Hansard Video. It's not uncommon to see very few cabinet ministers in the chamber. It's extremely rare to see half the cabinet in the chamber at the one time. They are not taking the actual parliament very seriously, they have full unfettered control & can destroy any opposition amendments to any bill. 

This means a ruling elite can construct a Bill without many of their own party even aware its coming until they get word. 

We also have a growing list of ministerial failures. 
The Pendulum will swing but such is the horse trading for positions in the WALabor Government there's going to be a near on punch up if the Premier even so much as entertains a cabinet reshuffle.

Here's what's lost.

1) In the "old days" wiser parliamentarians who wanted to stay elected for a longer time knew and operated wisely. They knew the next election campaign starts the day after an election campaign result is settled. Every day between elections WAS the campaign. 
That's now lost. Now there's four and a half day news cycles. If you want to announce something with less fuss & criticism you make a soft announcement long before that doing "x" was a very likely possibility depending on advice and better forecasts as they become available. That's code for, we've already decided & amongst the decision is this dead cat bounce pre-announcement to lessen the blow...and we'll likely make the real announcement around midday on a Friday when all the news outlets are well & truly into full Sport Mode for the weekend. During AFL season is the best time for a weekend softner, Monday morning it'll be time diluted due to reporting on weekend sporting results.
Unsure? Well the dead cat bounce softner announcement for removing the State of Emergency (SOE) has happened already. Thats the SOE we already know is not based on Health Advice. They'll be fishing for every softner coupled with every distraction they can muster.

2) Parties are corporate governance black holes. All parties have Machiavellean players with way too much influence and control, with way too many people getting out of their lane & into the Over Reach Freeway with little or no tension or pull back. 
All parties need Corporate Governance reviews & widespread party reforms. The one party (like them or hate them) the Liberals, is well under way in a review & a reform. They & the Nationals should have both undergone full blown review, reforms, recalibration & then reboot in 2015. I say that now because I was saying it at the time.
7 years later, MPs have been controlling their Parliamentary Party (which is fine) but sadly they've also been controlling their organisations. All parties are in this predicament. It has several resulting problems. Machiavellean acts increase. Corporate Governance declines. Good people trying to effect good improvements will be targeted & be tipped under the bus and MPs will have very little accontibility in the organisation itself. That is, they are less answerable to the lay members & their equivilent of a board, the group that run the organisation, the ones who are repsonsible for Strategic Thinking are either over run, bypassed or stacked to the point they cannot deliver good governance & their proper fiduciary duty. That or they just do the MPs bidding & lay members get token double speak.
No party is free of this problem. None.

3) As good people leave the volunteer roles, the organisation's elected positions due to being targeted, undermined so to do other good people donating time to help the party do what they assume is the aim, help the state & the most vulnerable. Leaving with them is volunteered time, skill & experience...and cash donors. The reliance then goes not to bread & butter mums & dads, but to large corporate donors most often they'll be property developers, media owners, mining entities (mostly the mainly foreign owned) and other larger special interest groups. Leaders will have high buck dinners & soirees with advocacy groups and other corporate players. You won't see them have black tie paid access booze ups with P&C groups, WA SHire Presidents, Drug rehab providers and advocates...only the big money in the big end of town. The spiral begins, human nature takes over and they accelorate their dive into corporate dollar pursuit.

These things not only take over, they push aside a party's culture, their actual core values get diluted or worse still completely lost. Those are the things that drive their strategic thinking, that directs their strategic planning & worse still when the parliamentary side gains greater control of any party, the Machivellean creeps in & the accountibility to its members fades away to a forgotten memory. All that remains is the scramble for election & re-election at the expense of the reason why people come together to put others into Parliament.
Now, the career is more important than the values of the party & the benefit to the electors. 
Now you have a greater amount of politicians not legislators who talk for hours under water with a mouthful of marbles & say very little. Politicians who can work the room when things are tough to keep critics one on one, not in a group where the politician has to yeild, to listen & to improve. In the group setting the poltiician needs only great oratory skills to help motivate the room, to entertain & inspire even though its smoke, mirrors and a deliberate made up performance.

If a pendulum were to swing it needs to stop swinging from one tribe to the other. It needs to swing from poor governance, poor strategic thinking planning, poor accountibility & greater control of the political optic & swing towards World's Best Corporate Governance, properly known policies, properly known procedures, properly known lines in the sand within the parties to halt over reach & manipulation. 
Its only then will we get back to Wise Progressives vs Real Conservatives in the Legislature. 
Until then we will be stuck with factions, Machiavellean thugsters, political theatre props and grifters after personal gains ala restructuring the personal debt, elevating their previous lowly go no where careers & building a retirement fund they could never do on their own. Too many grifting thespians with above average debating skills.



FWIW - Many people get turn off as soon as they use the words "Ruling Elite" as a critical descriptor, but they sadly it is a valid descriptor & turning away only gifts more control to the grifters at the top.

The Premier is one of the more successful election leaders WA has seen. He ran a Labor tidal wave result in 2017, when the pendulum swung against the Colin Barnett Government. Then in 2020 McGowan followed it up with a monumental Political Tsunami despite Labor's less than stunning performance. No infrastructure has been signed off under Labor except MetroNet which is billions over budget & years over due. I think all the new schools, the Optus Stadium and hospitals were signed off under Barnett. Health Portfolio is very sharp decline into a far worsening crisis. Poltiical masterclass, governing disaster. 1200 Ambulance ramping hours under Barnett was rightly described by opposition Health Spokesperson Roger Cook as a crisis. As minister it regularly hit above 3000 hours and Cook described it as operating "fantastically" and operating at full capacity. 
People died though. And now under Sanderson its set to hit the first ever record high of 7000 hours and sections of hospital corridors are taped off to keep patients on gurneys for treatment.
To then have such a massive swing in 2020 was a political master stroke...despite the actual poor performance from 2017-2020. Such is our problem, political optics trump performance.
In this landscape, when the pendulum swings it will swing too hard, too far the other way...
We may end up with boom crash style stability as any traces of Statesmanship are lost. Taken out the back & shot by Public Relations gurus & media manipulators.

Proven - Corruption in the Australian Media

Yes, that's the claim, the Australian media is corrupt, is full of corruption. The Left control the ABC, The Gaurdian & maybe one or two of the commercial TV channels. The right, controls anything Murdoch, anything Sky and some of the commercial networks.

The thing is, it's never actually been proven & if it is provable what can be done?
Well I'm going to have to go look & find out because if there is corruption, even intellectual corruption it has to stop & it has to be called out.

Sky gets called right leaning, yet Graham Richardson is on there. He's never slammed Sky & don't be fooled, "Richo" is no boby's bitch & he is not without money or influence. 

ABC gets slammed with being left leaning. Well maybe it is or maybe very few conservative commentators go there or not invited there. Some of their shows do try for some balance...

I think the greater problem is the same old problem that we see in politics. When you're thinking skullduggery by all means seek it out, look under the bed or behind the curtains for LWNJs & RWNJs...but remember ot never under estimate incompetence and the easy headline.

Roe v Wade blew up & somehow here in Australia it went ballistic, even though the decision to over turn Roe v Wade had constitutional validity & many commentators ignored the 10th Amendment that the Supreme Court Justices did not. Somehow here, lazy politicians cranked up, including some so called conservatives & missed the point. The decision was not about Abortion being legal or illegal, it was about the validity of if being covered under the constitutition & that in overturning it returned it to being a matter for the states to decide & legislate. What it did was halt a federal government committing over reach & over ruling a matter that is state law. We remember this here as the concept of federalism. I heard many MPs, journos, political commentators crank up and get this so horribly wrong & talk about a woman's rights to her body. Totally, completely unconnected to the over turning. Overturning Roe v Wade was not about abortion, it was about State Laws vs Federal Over Reach.
Fact that so many journos, MPs & commentators missed this...no not a conspiracy it was just very lazy...no very sloppy & lazy thinking (or not thinking) where people made up their mind & then tried to prove it.

Trump Raids. I'll wait & see but here's the thing if this turns out to be a political raid there's some people who will need to be charged & someone will have to go to jail. At this point I do not agree that Russians were involved in electing Trump nor electing Biden. One minute Trump "stole the election" next it was claimed "Biden stole the election" with Russian help.
I think Trump was the man they need to be in the White House at that time, they need a great disruptor. In many ways the USA did better than it had on a number of things when Trump was there compared to Biden. But next election I hope Trump, Biden & Kamala Harris are not in the White House. They & therefore we in the rest of the world need to see an experienced politician, one with many straits of Statesmanship if we're all to do better.

I think if the Trump raids do turn out to be a political raid it not only presents a sign of immense danger already within their political system it also means Trump is more likely to run & far more likely to get elected as President at the next election. It may yet turn out to be the biggest backfiring political act of treason.

What I hope happens is Trump rides the raids out & whatever happens pursues full justice on whoever is in the wrong & decides to not run. The criteria for running for President is pretty simple, have to have been born in the USA and have to be over 35 years of age...and thats about it.
The disqualifications are pretty straight forward & in their constitution too. Most don't realise you cna actually run for the office of President even if you're in jail but I think ineligible if its a serious crime like murder or rape.

Trump is going to have to be charged, that leads to the idea lawyers call "discovery" and that will show the intent of the warrant, what the FBI believed was there. Anything else they find might lead to charges but if there's no 'whatever the warrant cites' there...well I think there's a good old house of cards about to not just fall but burst into FBI flames. Especially is they do find out the Hunter Biden LapTop was given a hidden snow job as Biden was running his Presidential campaign. I don't think the media is corrupt on that matter either, but largely incompetent. I have seen a number of video memes that show US commentators from many different networks using the exact same language on many topics. Lot of lazy parrots in the US ranks.

So no, I do not claim there is corruption in the Australian or US media. If that were true then there is definite corruption in both State & Federal Parliaments in Australia & the USA. There might be but there's no reason to think there is at this stage. There's some really good journos, commentators, broadcaster, Senators, Members of Parliament & they kinda stand out because they're so few. They'd stand out more but I think their percentage is so low they are a lesser voice in all the noisey din.

I also am not sure, at least in Australia anyway how a news network or media giant can be so one sided and therefore influence the outcome of an election. If the ABC/Stokes is so far left & Sky/Murdoch is so far right wouldn't they only be pitching to one side?
Wouldn't they be preaching to the choir?

Another mystery (with hindsight) is how Joe Biden became the most voted for President in their Nation's history. Yup I'm sure the negative side of Trump helped cause that but do you really think Biden was so much better than Obama?
I guess there were many people from the centre & many more "never voted before" electors who registered to vote to get Trump out. I think some of them might be suffering voter's remorse. Maybe a 2nd term of Trump might have been better than his first, maybe it might have been worse than the current Biden one...we will never know.

We do know, Kamala Harris was not even good enough to get passed their first round of Presidential debates & pulled out but somehow was better than all the other runners up & made Vice President.
Think about that, all the candidates bar maybe one laid waste to Kamala Harris & she somehow ends up Vice President. How, why?

Because Joe Biden declared from the outset he would choose his Vice President running mate & it would be a black woman. She was chosen because she's black & she's female.
It is very likely that America Has Fallen some time ago, the Trump Raids and their ensuing wreckage will determine it once & for all if it has.

I think the same is happening here, we have maybe 10% good MPs spread across all parties. The rest are either restructuring their pre Parliament debt, professionally elevating themselves far & well beyond their pre-Parliament prospects & enjoying the attention, influence & invites they never would have got Pre Parliament. I think too, some are there for the retirement package. The number of very low to medium level managers in government & quasi government entities is amazing...and scaring many of us.  

Albany Advertiser Article the Referendum on Voice To Parliament.

Here's the article in question. page 3 Albany Advertiser 4th of August 2022.

The article headlines as a comment from Liberal MP for O'Connor Rick Wilson. To be fair the paper also sought comment from Albany Indigenous identity Lester Coyne. I thought that was more than appropriate considering you want as many sides as possible given space. 

First up disclaimer, I have met Lester Coyne twice but I can't say I know him. I only have spoken to him twice and both times it was at polling booths during an election polling day. It was very cordial but far too brief, as I like to get indiginous knowledge & history whenever I can. I'm from much further north so the Menang people are well outside the sphere where I grew up. In any case, don't think I'm wrong in saying Lester is a thoroughly likeable bloke, seems a genuinely good bloke despite our differing political leanings. I'm from the conservative side & he's a Greens Party man (or was when we spoke) and I'd have to say he's probably the most reasonable Greens person you might come across. He talks his view & won't bulldust you. You cannot ask for anything better than that.

Lester being a good bloke is great, but like minded or differing we all need to challenge our own thinking.

So on his comments in the article I do think he's messed it up a little. 

First he wants more details, "What sort of voice, whose voice?" 

The article then claimed Lester said he's worried people "will get too caught up in details as a way of delaying it".

I'll make a prediction, the referendum as it's currently framed will fail. I'm not even sure if it's being deliberately framed for failure or whether its purely incompetence by the Albanese Government. With the political lens applied with strong focus, there's an argument for saying the Labor Government could gain political capital if its passed or if it fails. Failing it can claim some are racist, uncaring & any other negative guilt terms & phrases. But their political win or loss aside, in the end Indigenous Australians will have been given the hope of a promised something & it will fail them. To an extent I think that will be the result if the currently framed referendum push actually passes. But as to whose voice & what sort of voice well that is actually known.
Lester wants detail then says he's worried detail might be used to delay it, whatever it actually is.
Then suggests we read the Final Report of the Referendum Council (*link below) which it sort of looks like he hasn't read it or he's forgotten what it says. Well I had read it. It says whose voice it is. Aboriginal & Torress Strait Islanders. It also says what sort of voice.

It appears to be non binding (at this stage) upon the Parliament. It will not interfere with "parliamentary supremacy" & would "enable the First Peoples of Australia to speak to Parliament and the nation about laws that concern them" We don't know what "concern them" actually means, whether its anything that interests a significant number of them, all of them, how they arrive at that point of concensus or if it's only matters that specifically impact Indigenous Communities. Its a little open ended. There's also the thought that if legislation if being formed at what point do the "People of the Voice" get involved. Once its drafted, once its tabled as a motion? If the people of the voice only get involved once it's tabled does it have to be shelved until they've had time to go through whatever consultation process they need to enact amongst First Peoples of Australia? I can see the time table of processing some Bills into an passed Act is going to blow out. Or is there an elite group of indigenous leaders elected by & acting on behalf of all Indigenous Peoples? I think this detail is very important & stunned it's missing. It might end up being a First Nations Parliament that influences what the actual Parliament passes. Or...? The scary part which I think will be a nail in the coffin is that the Voice, will have its structure & its functions determined by the Parliament through legislation...by the ruling party & subsequently it can be altered by the Parliament. That is THE most important detail of all details. The majority political party in Government will set the structure & function and any ruling Government afterwards could add, delete or alter it if they have the numbers. A CONSTITUTIONALLY ENSHRINED BODY REPRSENTING ONE RACE GROUP WILL HAVE ALL IT'S STRUCTURE & FUNCTION DETERMINED AFTER THE REFERNDUM AND A RULING PARTY CAN ALTER IN THE PARLIAMENT AS THEY SEE FIT. You hopefully see this. A Constitutional Side Step. An enshrined constitutional mechanism will need absolutely no referendum of all Australians to be changed. It will be a referendum on side stepping the constitution on constitutional amendments. Big no vote for me.

Now add into this...the Uluru Statement website (** Link below) stated this...

So for some at least, maybe the Government maybe not, we don't know...the aim is 2 seperate sovereignties but one has its membership based purely on race, the other is based on Australian citizenship regardless of race, creed, colour, religion, location within Australia etc. This is another big No Vote for me. It shamefully suggests values & identities are seperate & non compatible, both are protected & a Voice is given in policies and laws made by one sovereignty (Australian parliament). As well meaning as this may have been by some, I think it's aims are out of control & out of the realm of bringing unity & will could potentially slow down the passage of laws dramatically. Once a Voice on a Bill has been given, what then if it's ignored or deemed not of value to the greater good of the greater number of Australians? Or will the lesser group by virtue of their race have a binding veto type say? All this lack of detail is counter productive & I think it will lead the referendum to an assured failure. Maybe then there will be detail. Referendums are extremely difficult to get passed. To quote the Parliamentary Education Office "Since 1901 there have been 19 referendums, proposing 44 changes to the Constitution; only 8 changes have been agreed to"

44 changes, 8 approved by the Austrlian people. That 18% success rate is unlikely to improve with this detail barren plebiscite. Those that have passed were to approve the changes that would Parliament enact...all detailed in advance. It was not a blank chequed signed off. Put it this way, when you apply for job would you be fine with all the terms & conditions not being outlined in the Job Advertisement nor at the interview? Would you be fine with agreeing to any & all employment details like salary, duties, hours worked per week ALL being sorted out AFTER you signed on as an employee?

If this referendum passes it'll be an absolute surprise to right thinking people. To some its as if its been wilfully designed to fail, or its one of the biggest ill concieved dumpster fires in recent living memory. As for whose Voice, it is going to raise the question who is a first nations person now & in the decades abd centuries to come. That is going to upset people greatly but there's already wide division just amongst Indigenous people over the suggested non Indigenous person Mr Pascoe & his claims regarding his own tribal membership (I'm told its changed several times). Plus questions about the accuracy of his version of Indigenous History. This is the real problem, when power, control & influence is based on race, amongst only one race it's then claimed their ruling elite benefit greatly & the monetary or decision making trickle down is barely a trickle. I think even if passed in whatever form, its not going to bring any benefits to people in remote communities or other semi remote regions. I think it's going to go down as "The Big Fat Lie" that let all of Australia down. With all that, we haven't touched the Bureacracy that The Voice will need, infrastructure, communications with all Indigneous people, staffing, voting & financial auditing... * https://www.referendumcouncil.org.au/final-report.html#toc-anchor-conclusion ** https://ulurustatement.org/