CACTUS: Ted Baillieu faces death by a thousand cuts over Liberal-Greens preference plot

Ted Baillieu dances with devil

The Victorian election campaign is being dominated by internal dissent within the Liberal party over party leader Ted Baillieu’s plan to preference the extreme-left Greens party over the more mainstream Labor government.

Many of his MPs are openly questioning their Leader’s decision, worried that it will taint the Liberal brand and confuse voters about what they stand for.

Normally parties have been well-served by a stonewall approach to questions on preferences, preferring to keep the sausage-making activity of negotiating with your political rivals behind closed doors.

But sometimes private preference plots prompt plenty of public punch-ups. Labor’s deal with Family First caused it no end of grief despite the architects of the deal – Alan Griffin and other Labor lefties – having very good reason to do it. When the heat reaches boiling point though, it’s generally considered wisest to put protecting the reputation of the party ahead of short-term expediency.

With today’s coverage in the Herald Sun of the latest round of internal crisis over Baillieu’s plan to elect as many as six Greens lower house MPs in a few short weeks, it is now clear that the strongly expressed private concerns of many Liberals about Baillieu’s judgment are now doing much to undermine the Victorian Liberals push for election. If they don’t trust him, how can we?

It’s been such a huge missed opportunity for the Libs too. Baillieu could publicly declared he was putting the extreme-left high-tax big-spend Greens party last and dared Brumby to do the same. If Brumby didn’t, he could have rightly tarred Brumby with the brush of the Greens least accceptable neo-Marxist policies. Instead, he’s reduced to micro-announcements about discounted swimming lessons, a war on dog breeders,  more social workers in schools and yesterday pledging an inconsequential sum of money to encourage Bollywood film production here in the face of a high dollar making that prospect very, very unlikely. Baillieu made the same policy announcement in 2006 apparently. All those talks with Greens radicals about preferences has appeared to encourage a bit of recycling.

Making matters worse today, one of Baillieu’s own backbenchers Gary Blackwood this morning told the ABC:

“My personal view is that I will not be preferencing the greens.”

No wonder Blackwood did so well in Narracan, a seat Labor would once have expected to hold in the La Trobe Valley. He is clearly a man of principle who is clear about what he stands for.

Tactically, causing trouble for Labor by unseating six of their best and brightest makes perfect sense. It will absorb funds that would otherwise go to other marginal seats.

But strategically, and it’s strategies that win wars, this is a disaster.

Not only is coddling the extreme-left Greens party tearing the Liberal party apart, in full public view, it’s damaging the Liberal brand when it needs to cut through the thick jungle of Brumby government spin and advertising by making it clear what they believe in.

You can’t hope to seen as a strong economic manager and be pushing to elect six Greens to the Legislative Assembly where money bills are initiated.

You can’t be tough on crime and be pushing for a much tougher approach to key law and order issues by actually working to elect six Greens to the lower house who will oppose essentially every single measure to make Police more effective, criminals more heavily punished and our state a safer place to live.

You can’t make a powerful argument about Labor’s silly attacks on coal pushing up electricity prices for those who can least afford it by preferencing to elect six Greens to the lower house who will push to shut down some of the world’s cheapest electricity sources and replace them with alternatives that will cost more than double, in some cases much more than that.

These are the kinds of  issues that get conservatives elected and keep them there.

Sometimes politicians get too clever by half when all the community wants is authenticity and clarity. Baillieu is seen as very flexible and small ‘l’ liberal, probably a good thing in this Massachusetts of the South. But politicians like that need to be especially careful to have absolute clarity about what they’re not flexible on.

Brumby has done much to neutralise economic management during his time as Treasurer and since. But there are law and order and cost of living worries that have cropped up and that any decent Opposition could exploit.

In this one issue about Greens preferences, about where the Liberals are able to prioritise political principle over tactics, it is becoming sadly clear that we don’t have a decent Opposition or certainly not a decent Opposition Leader.

The Herald Sun has spent much of the last year beating up the Brumby government on a wide range of issues where their performance hasn’t been great.

image A decent Opposition could and should have worked with them, understood the paper’s vital role in Melbourne and regional Victoria, that it’s an uncannily accurate reflection of who we are and what we prioritise.

Instead they have repeatedly failed to listen.

It’s as if Ted Baillieu is above what a tabloid newspaper’s concerns might be. He’s an Age reader, and certainly a keen contributor via their Paul Austin who engages in many a late night phone call with Baillieu.

And the result is carnage. I don’t think there’s been worse coverage of any political leader’s election campaign since Joan Kirner in 1992 when Piers Akerman was large and in charge and occasionally depicted Kirner with a hammer-and-sickle.

Playing footsie with the Greens, turning up his nose to the Herald Sun could end up being Ted’s last, big political error. If Baillieu can’t win this time, not even his cunning internal factional power-plays could save him as party leader.

As rich as this lucky heir might be, Ted Baillieu simply can’t afford another week like this. He could turn it all around by going on the front foot about the rising tide of Greens party policy menace. Sadly, it appears he won’t.

Advertisements

40 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

40 responses to “CACTUS: Ted Baillieu faces death by a thousand cuts over Liberal-Greens preference plot

  1. Walter Plinge

    “He’s an Age reader…”

    Says it all. Jeff Kennett refused to soil his fingers handling The Age’s over-inked pages. No decent conservative does.

  2. democracyATwork

    LAST TIME I VOTED GREEN, NOT THIS TIME – I WILL VOTE ALP

    I have been trying to raise these issues in discussion on Crikey blogs BUT have been banned from Crikey for publishing information critical of the Greens candidate and preference deals with the Liberal Party.

    Crikey has become a Green Left publication displaying extreme bias in its editorial policy.

  3. Brimbank Party hack

    The more I think of it,I think it is a smart move to give the Watermelons the second preferences in those six inner Melbourne seats.He knows that it will be hard to win this election,but by getting the Watermelons preferences in tight outer seats he can win those.Those inner seats,he has no hope of winning,but will take them away from Labor.With Brumby forced to form a minor covernment and having to do as the Watermelons tell him,Victoria will be a sad and unhappy State and the pissed of voters can not wait to put the Libs back into there rightfull place.They are born to rule,dont we all know that

  4. Greg Barber has been exposed for not representing the interests of his electorate. he has stated that he has not traveled outside of Zone 1 even though most of his electorate is within Zone Two.

    His is only known within the Inner city “cafe late” zone.

    In recent interview with Andrew Bolt highlights some of his wacky idealistic notions.

    Beyond reality

    Andrew Bolt
    Friday, July 02, 2010 at 7:01am

    ENOUGH’S enough. If you’re really this keen to vote Green in the state election, why not prove you’re serious?

    Why not live the life you apparently want the Greens to inflict on the rest of us?

    Go turn off your own lights first. Kill your fridge. Cook your roast over a solar-powered candle.

    Then go to work and turn off the machines. Junk the computer. Tell your hospital to switch off the machines that go “bing”. And harness some donkeys to pull our trains.

    Can’t find donkeys, you say? Nonsense. Look at yesterday’s Newspoll, which reports a record 18 per cent of Victorians plan to vote Green.

    Plenty there. Hook ’em up.

    I laugh, but dear God, we’re drowning, up to our necks in unreason.

    “There, there,” coos my wife, when I sob that even some of our frequent-flyer friends vote Greens.

    “They wouldn’t vote Greens if they actually thought they’d win … ”

    No? Well, they’re winning enough already, like the battle for our brains.

    And who knows what desperate deal Premier John Brumby will now do to win the Greens preferences that are critical to Labor getting the 51 to 49 per cent edge over the Coalition that Newspoll assumes?

    We’ve already seen what depths of insanity Labor will cater to, to prove it’s as green as the next idiot.

    Why else has this great city been on water restrictions for an embarrassing seven years?

    Why this insane ban on a new dam for our fast-growing capital?

    Why did the Government wait until it was almost too late to even start building its new $3.5 billion desalination plant, at three times the price of a dam for a third of the water?

    Madness, and the Greens promise yet more of it – and less of everything else.

    Take just one of their policies, one that 18 per cent of shiny-eyed Victorians evidently now support.

    The Greens demand the instant closure of Hazelwood power station to save the world from global warming.

    It’s a noble policy, which sounds warm and fuzzy, until you realise it will leave us cold and shivering, while making not a spit of difference to the planet.

    Hazelwood – and I know this is an irrelevant detail to a planet-saver – happens to produce a quarter of this state’s electricity. You know, the stuff that powers your home, your factory, your office, your hospital, your computer, your trains, your airport, your street lighting, your cinema, your trams, your traffic lights …

    Now I don’t want to seem like a spoilsport, but I would just like to be reassured on one small point: how the hell do the Greens then plan to power our state?

    After all, they don’t plan to stop at Hazelwood, either. Their policy is to shut every coal-fired plant, leaving us with just 5 per cent of the electricity we now use – with nuclear power banned, new hydro power banned and wind power as reliable as, well, the wind.

    It’s madness of the kind you get from a child who wants her fifth ice cream but not the upchuck that goes with it. Still, you’d think the Greens would have worked out by now these small details about how to keep the lights burning. Right?

    But let’s run the tape from my chat yesterday on MTR 1377 to Greens MP Greg Barber.

    Me: How are you going to replace the power we need to keep going our hospitals, our factories, our homes?

    Greg: The simplest way is to save energy rather than use it in the first place.

    Me: Save 95 per cent of our energy?

    Greg: I took over my place and I cut my energy bill by half and you won’t see us freezing or doing anything like that.

    Me: Ninety-five per cent of our electricity comes from coal-fired power generation … I’m just asking, how you would replace 95 per cent of our power?

    Greg: I’d say homes and businesses around Australia could probably cut their energy bills by half and they wouldn’t even notice until they got the bill because it’s called energy efficiency.

    Me: A factory, how would that cut its power by half?

    Greg: Ah, lighting, heating, airconditioning, and, um, ah …

    Me: You’re serious?

    Greg: Well, businesses are already doing it.

    Me: Half! No, Greg, please, half? That’s incredible.

    Greg: Come and look at the office building I’m in some time.

    Me: I’m looking at an electrically powered train going by me right now. How is that going to cut its power use by half?

    Greg: There’s a thing called traction braking, for an example, that actually recycles the energy of the train when it slows down to be used when it speeds up again.

    Oh, please. If you think this is remotely possible, dear Greens voter, consider first that this state is actually predicted to need 50 per cent more power by 2030, even though many companies, hit with higher power bills, have tried for years to cut their use.

    Then go around your home – and, more importantly, your factory – and switch off half the power.

    With all appliances off, look proudly at the appalled people around you in winter and say, “Isn’t it great we’re all freezing to death for the planet?”

    Or, in summer, for variety, ask: “Isn’t it lovely to be sweating in this furnace now that I’ve switched off the aircon?”

    And then, by the kerosene lamp at home, try to figure out the next step. After all, you’re still only halfway to replacing the 95 per cent of electricity the Greens plan to ban.

    Let me just try to get it through your cable-knit beanie how impossible that is without reducing this state to the standard of living endured by people who burn cow dung for their cooking.

    For Earth Hour this year, the zealots at Melbourne University tried especially hard to cut their power. The university exhorted staff and students to do their best to save the planet from their electricity, and to “turn off all lights and appliances”. All of them.

    And the result? Read the University’s boast: “Electricity consumption on the Earth Hour weekend dropped by 5.51 per cent compared with a 2010 business as usual weekend.”

    Less than 6 per cent? After all that special sacrifice? For just one weekend?

    Whoopee do. And that’s from a mere university, mind, which runs no heavy industry or essential services, and had almost no one in the joint over that weekend actually wanting to work or switch on so much as a toaster or kettle.

    Just 90 per cent to go, guys, before you live the Greens’ dream.

    But there I go, trying to marry consequence to action, like I was an adult or something. Don’t I realise the times have changed? After all, this is the Age of the Use Less, in which our brainless and godless rich resent their own wealth – well, resent the wealth of everyone else, at least. And then, for penance, suggest ingenious ways to make us poor again.

    Example: remember how this Labor Government told us for years we didn’t need more water supplies, claiming we could get by if we just Used Less?

    And so our ovals turned brown, our gardens died and we broke our backs carting buckets to the most precious of our plants. Use Less, heaven!

    Ah, but you think I exaggerate this madness of our times. So let me introduce you to the latest guru of this Use Less creed, “anti-poverty crusader” Richard Fleming, as featured this week in the Herald Sun and on Channel 7’s Today Tonight.

    He, too, preaches Use Less, or eat less, actually. He’s promoting his $2 a day “Live Below the Line” diet, which restricts you to eating the very cheapest of foods – hummus, watery soup, dahl, rice, marmalade and peanut paste.

    No real reason for this torture, other than to make you realise what it must be like to be some starving Bangladeshi, wishing you were lucky enough to live in a country where you had so much to eat that you’d, er, starve yourself instead. Out of sheer, mindless guilt.

    “There’s a level of stupidity in all this,” Fleming admits, but he should be less hard on himself.

    He’s the poster boy of a state in which so many finger-waggers want to deny the rest of us the harvest of our science and ingenuity – cooling on hot days, heating on cold ones, water for green gardens and food for a feast.

    Fine, if that’s what you want for yourself. But, please, before you vote to inflict this on the rest of us, first try living as the Greens prescribe and see if it truly suits even high-minded you.

    Lights out. Heating, too. Starve and shiver for your faith. At least live as miserably as you plan to vote.

  5. The Greens can not deliver preferences in the lower house but they can deliver preferences in the upper house where the above the line ticket vote will direct unsuspecting Green voter’s preferences to the Liberal Party. Only 3% of voters vote below the line, the majority of Green voters will vote above the line.

    Greg Barber and his to other Green Victorian MP’s have been voting in Parliament with the Liberal Party 69% of the time.

    There was a suggestion that the Greens may register a democrat style “Split Ticket” If this is the case not only are they canceling out their vote they are handing over upto three upper-house seats to the Liberal National Party in exchange for a support of preferences in the inner city seats of Melbourne, Richmond and Brunswick.

    There was even a press release distributed by the Greens in which they indicated they would support a Liberal National coalition.

    So desperate are the Greens to secure Liberal party Preferences. But can they be trusted.

    Both Liberal and Green voters should be aware of the double edged sword and the deals being reached.

    There is a real risk that the LNP could secure control of both houses of Parliament or the Greens will hold the balance of power in the lower house. If this happens then Victoria’s economic stability will suffer.

  6. Adrian Jackson

    Who in there right mind would follow a HTV card anyway. HTV’s should be banned from being handed out at polling stations.

    Even when I was in the Liberals (1994-2003) I put Liberal [1] but after that I chose the order I liked and Family Farce, DLP, Creepy Christians etc were down there near the bottom with the ALP (last).

    In Albert Park District I am voting Independent (first), Greens, Liberal and Labour (last).

  7. anon

    As an ex-ALP member and lifetime voter up until now, I’m going to vote for ‘The Greens’ with pride and I hope they put it up the majors big time.

  8. greens and Hockey - two disasters awaiting humanity

    This is Hockey
    “Labor are our opponent, it’s up to Ted Baillieu what he does,” he said. “There will be things about the Sex Party, the Greens, a whole range of parties that (Liberals) don’t agree with, but if you want to win government, well.”

    Hockey and Baillieu fail to understand that they are making it harder for the party to gain government out right which is their solemn duty to achieve. The Greens are just a world of pain for us, Tories. The more resources they have the more it will be spent preferencing Labor in the marginals to keep us out!!

  9. “The Greens can not deliver preferences in the lower house but they can deliver preferences in the upper house where the above the line ticket vote will direct unsuspecting Green voter’s preferences to the Liberal Party. Only 3% of voters vote below the line, the majority of Green voters will vote above the line.

    The Green’s hope to trade 3 upper-house members for a shot at inner Melbourne lower house seats.

    These preference deals do not take into consideration the view of their Members. The Greens are just as grubby as the rest.

  10. Rene

    If they held a debate between Greg Barber and a blond hairdresser.

    The hairdresser would win.

  11. Adrian Jackson

    Sen Helen Kroger was quoted in the press yesterday saying preferences with the Greens will lead to voluntary euthanasia and same sex marriage.

    well Helen you are out of touch as usual as most Aussie support both.

    Anyhow Helen a successful same sex marriage is better that a failed heterosexual marriage. Perhaps you and Ann Peacock could team up as a couple.

  12. Bev Michaels

    You only dislike the Greens and the feral left because they don’t swallow your kosher diatribe from the warmongering zionists. No more war for Israel. Let Ahmadjihadarabs Iran and Israel nuke each other.

  13. Anthony.

    Yes, I’m sure a bunch of ALP hacks such as yourselves have the best interest of the LNP at heart. I’m a Greens voter who will be preferencing the LNP regardless of what the HTV says. The thought of another term with you drongo’s steering this ship makes me want to swallow razor blades. Believe me, there are a lot of us. Wake up wankers.

  14. Little Kevvie

    Do you know what?

    The ALP will also preference the Greens.

  15. Anybody know when the Libs will announce their preference deals?

  16. Anonymous

    The first party to reject any prospect of a greens preference deal wins this election. It’ll take some courage.

    High stakes wagers are needed when playing a high stakes game.

  17. Margie Andrews is a drunk

    There was an interesting story in nameless about the wife of Kevin Andrews acting in a truly bizarre manner. Interesting that the author didn’t spell out the obvious point that most Canberra insiders know, both Kevin and his wife like to drink..a lot!

  18. Learn to count

    @Little Kevvie:

    Yes it will, but it will not help the Greens win any seat in the Assembly, where the Government is formed.

    There will always be Greens in the Upper House, it’s a proportional system. For all of Andrew’s prognostications, they are largely harmless and isolated there.

    But four or five Greens in the lower house, potentially holding the balance of power and the Government to ransom, would be devastating to the state’s stability.

    This outcome can only be achieved through Liberal preferences in seats where the Greens poll within striking distance of Labor, with Liberals excluded and preferences allocated.

  19. Pissy

    Does Margie drink man milk like me?

  20. Boofa Leigh

    I would preferece the Greens as long I got some ‘consultancy’ work out of them. BTW what is a consultant? (I keep telling people I am a consultant and for the life of me I have no idea what they do – but give me a saw and hammer and I can build you a fence anyday…..)

  21. Alex Honk

    oh noes!!

  22. Alex Hork

    Oh noes! My candidate for the Hills didn’t come through! My days are numbered!

  23. Ashley Pittard

    I want my $175,000 back Alex. A promise is a promise.

  24. Wisdom

    Anon and any disenchanted Labor voters who think they are actually thinking of sticking it up the Labor Party by voting Greens: The only vote that will count on their tickets will be the preferences. You may feel good at the polling booth but you will end up with the same incompetent government (unless you actually think and preference the LNP second ).

  25. Preferences registration closes on November 14 for the upper-house Group voting Tickets.

    November 15 – 19 HTV registration Followed by a three days for corrections

    Last time I also voted Green but not this time

    Just watch, the Greens will be in a preference deal with the Liberal Party, This will cause serious conflict and destabilization in the Federal Arena. The Greens can not help themselves.

    The Greens can not be elected without Liberal Preferences. The ALP preferences are not distributed. In the rural seats where they are they will support independents

    I suspect the ALP will be referencing other candidates before the Greens.

    And to correct Teds lies . The Greens were elected to the upper house on the back of Green preferences.

  26. Real Change is when you vote Lib before ALP!

    Don;t worry about preferences – the most importnat thing is if yo want to see the end of the Brumby Labor mob, put Labor last!

  27. Ashley Pittard

    I am lost.

    Which way back to Pittwater.

  28. Miles

    But what about ME????

    Alex, you PROMISED me a Senate seat!!

  29. hababa

    While the hysteria continues about Greens preferences lets not forget that to rid us of Brumby we must vote Coalition. Helen Kroger didnt say boo when the deal was done with Adam Brandt. She just took the opportunity to do a knife job on Ted.
    Given the Victorian Senate Coalition ticket had the lowest count for decades she needs to lift her game as Ronno wont be able to bail her out next time.
    Liberals need to concentrate on the main game and that is to get rid of Labor candidates to be able to govern.

  30. Hawke Hunter

    For all the division, all the infighting, all the bad media and all the distractions…what has Alex Hawke achieved?

    David Elliot in the most manipulated and rorted pre-selection of all time. And, yes, the same David Elliot that was pushing around a dirt sheet about Hawke’s sexuality only a year or so ago.

    Well done Alex. Give yourself a pat on the back.

  31. The best way to ensure Victoria is not the next hung parliament is to put the Greens last or behind the ALP and the LNP. The Greens can only be elected in the lower house on the back of Liberal Preferences.

    It was the Liberal Party that elected Adam Brant. Had the Liberal Party polled better they would not have come third.

    The focus of any preference deal will be in the upper-house.

    As correctly stated above the only place where the Greens can direct preferences is in the Upper-house.

    In 2006 the Greens where elected to the Legislative Council on the back of Liberal Party surplus preference votes.

    Big Ted lied during the debate when he denied or side stepped this fact.

  32. mal

    The video by Greens candidate for Pascoe Vale Liam Farrelly is all the evidence needed to show they’re capable of anything.

  33. Sally T

    Is a crazy ad. Doubt that anyone over 25 would consider him a serious candidate.

  34. Fiona Pickett

    The Greens are the only party that protects the workers. It is pro-Union and anti-employer. That makes it the ideal party for public servants like myself who want to impose more rules and regulations on business people so they don’t make any money.

  35. not Mike Baird

    i am so glad i have no threat to becming the next treasurer – bad luck alex! – never trust me!!

  36. Tommy Nohope

    Burrppp, my Dad’s preselection was rigged…..burpppp

  37. ABC Electoral Analyst, Antony Green, has been exposed publishing false and misleading information, In doing a comparison analysis between the 2010 Senate and the Victorian upper-house statistics Antony green excluded from his calculation pre-polling and postal votes. This omission has the effect of inflating the ALP and the Green preferences and underestimating the true value of the Liberal Party vote.

    In responding to our question Antony Green stated:

    GREEN COMMENT: I stand by figures. I have allocated all polling places by which region they lie in, including splitting electorates that lie in more than one region. I didn’t include the pre-poll and postal votes because it rarely makes a massive difference.

    Well it does make a difference and the margin between the ALP winning a second seat and the Liberal party winning three seats is much closer as a result.  If the Greens, as has been suggested her and on numerous other web sites, issue a split ticket they will be giving the Liberal party a heads up  The analysis provided by Anthony Green of ALP 2, LNO 2. Gen 1) is wrong.

    GREEN COMMENT: Why should I allocate a split Green preference ticket? You assert the Greens will do this. If the Greens do issue a split ticket, we will know on Sunday and it will be the biggest story of the election campaign. I see no reason to start off analysis by assuming a flow of preferences that has never happened.

    Well Sunday is a bit late the public need to be properly informed.  Antony Green in not publishing in more detail the margin for a change in outcome has mislead the public.  On comparing the Southern Metro to Senate vote the margin is within 1-2% and a split Green ticket would favour the Liberal Party. Anthony Green should know this to be true but he committed to mention this fact. Why?  He makes all kinds of predictions after all is not the swing chart a prediction based on statistical data? To publish an incomplete data set is another issue that only compounds the omission.

    Further there is concern that Antony Green has politically censored commenst publihsed on his web site. Edited out are the following comments on Victoria’s Upper house regions. (Published here in full)

    SOUTHERN METRO
    ————————

    The ALP and Green data has been inflated and the LNP under valued. If you run a simulation count based on the 2010 preference distribution, including the below the line vote , for Southern Metro and then add in a split ticket or have the Greens Preference the Liberal Party in their above-the-line group voting ticket then the results most certainly do change.

    The Greens can not direct preferences for the lower house BUT they can direct preferences for the upper-house, Most above the line voters will not know where the preferences are allocated and how they will play out in the count. Only 3% of all vpters vote below-the-line. Add to that the distortion on the proportionality of the count arising from the flawed non weighted calculation of the Surplus Transfer value and the method and order of distributing preference data from excluded candidates and the election results are very much on a knifes edge.

    WESTERN METRO

    ———————-

    The Greens won Western Metro after a recount.  500 votes went missing and unaccounted for between Count A and Count B.  Either the VEC double counted in count A or votes were removed.  the total number of votes between count A and count B should never change. The Greens won on the second recount by less than 150 votes. 

    When the  Parliament requested copies of the Count A preference data files for comparison the VEC claimed that the data had been deleted and overwritten.  No backup copies made.  This is hard to believe for a professional organisation were this information costs millions of dollars to collate.  No audit trail of count A in comparison to count B exists. 

    The AEC maintain copies of both count A and count B data comparisons. what benefit was there in the VEC duplicating the development of software to count the vote when the AEC already had a better version which  could have been used free of cost?  Millions of dollars wasted in duplicated software resources.

    NORTHERN METRO

    ————————

    The VEC due to a lack of due diligence resulted in doggy data being feed into their computerised count. There was no check or verification to ensure that the number of votes recorded reconciled with the number of ballot papers issued prior to the solution of the election results.  we are told that the VEC will produce a reconciliation report prior to the count but has yet to provide a sample copy of what this report will look like and what information it will contain. In 2006 the VEC failed to provided copies of the preference data files to scrutineers.,  This information was only made available following an FOI application and even then they only provided information related to the final count not the preliminary counts.  Data files had been overwritten without backup copies being made.  Even though copies of the information had been requested prior to the commencement of the count

    The elections costs Victoria over 50 million dollars and hopefully we will not see a repeat of the mistakes that were made in 2006.

  38. QUOTE:
    If the Greens do issue a split ticket, we will know on Sunday and it will be the biggest story of the election campaign. Antony Green ABC Electoral Analyst

    The Greens can not direct preferences in the lower-house but they can in the Upper-house thanks to the above-the-line voting system

    The Greens are expected to register a split ticket delivering the LNP a third seat in Southern Metro and if they do likewise in other seats they could (In Exchange for inner city preferences) deliver control of both houses of Parliament should the Liberal party win a majority in the lower house.

    This election is much closer then many people think. we could end up with a hung parliament as is the case Federally and in Tasmania.

    No wonder many Liberal party members are opposed to a preference deal with the Greens. There is too much at stake. Victoria can not afford the Greens holding the balance of power.

  39. Jennnnnnnnnnnnnnnn

    That’s right real change is when you vote for Libs. Put Labor last. Just like you i’m all for privatisation it’s the best thing for us. Thanks to the good old Libs flogging of our water gas electricity our transport. Now no government even the good old Libs can stop private enterprise. If you had your own private business you would’nt let someone else dictate to you how to run your business and especialy what price you choose to put on your products. Now the private gas electricity and water company’s can stick up bills skyhigh, fantastic i say, bring it on that’s why i’m voting for the Libs they were the ones that sold it off in the first place. And it will be proven we are so sorry we try to stop it 1999 election. But this is our best opportunity to bring it all back. And all i can say for you and a vast majority of us we are so sorry we voted Labor, and thank God we will never have to say sorry for voting Liberal.

  40. Will

    What preference deal? Like always, just an ALP scare tactic.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s