November 30, 2004 | Graham

Could Palm Island be safe as houses?



Liberal MP for Herbert, Peter Lindsay, thinks the answer to the Palm Island riots could lie in reforms to land tenure. He’s not alone. Former Mayor of Palm Island, Robert Blackley, raised this issue in a talk that he gave to the Brisbane Institute on the 13th March, 2001. On a recent Australia Talks Back programme, co-chair of Reconciliation Australia, Fred Chaney, tantalisingly mentioned land tenure as an indigenous issue, but didn’t expand on it. He might have been at cross purposes with the others, but then again, he might not.
Lindsay is quoted by the ABC as saying:

I strongly support making changes to land tenure on Palm Island.
It’s the key to improving the self esteem of islanders and to bringing about local integration.
It will provide an opportunity for economic participation and home ownership, something islanders cannot even dream about under the deed of grant in trust tenure.

I think it is overly simplistic to restrict the problem to one issue, but undoubtedly economic conditions on the island play a part in a general culture of nihilism, as well as tending to organise the community in destructive ways.
Land tenure is recognised as a problem in many parts of the world. For example Hernando de Soto has shown the devastating results of faulty land tenure in his own country of Peru, which, among other things, leads to increased cocaine production.
Land tenure in Palm Island is a form of collective ownership – a soviet style system imposed by the Bjelke-Petersen government. Blackley outlines the particular consequences of collectivism on what should be an island paradise. As one might expect it includes corruption of the endemic, but not prosecutable type.
Perhaps the Palm Island riots will cause a rethink about more than policing which might transform Aboriginal communities in a way that some of the more collectivist solutions of Noel Pearson probably won’t.



Posted by Graham at 8:49 am | Comments (5) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 29, 2004 | Graham

Mergers and Acquisitions



Every day Lawrence Springborg is looking more like the Chris Skase of Queensland politics. Skase (and other ‘entrepreneurs’ like Alan Bond) made a career of propping up shaky businesses by acquiring even larger businesses which they controlled via a pyramid of debt. They specialised in things like back-door takeovers, where you took control of an elephant using a flea.
The results of the latest Courier-Mail TNS polling show just what I mean. The Courier is running a campaign for amalgamation, which might explain why they reported the results in terms of Peter Beattie’s hold on power. In fact, the poll shows Beattie still strongly in control of the state with 52% of the two-party preferred vote. The party in trouble is the Queensland National Party, which has dropped from 17 per cent to 8 per cent, while the Liberals have increased from 18.5 per cent to 26 percent.
The Springborg merged party idea is really an attempt to parlay the Nationals’ still strong membership base into control of the Liberals’ much smaller one so as to capture the electoral assets of the Liberals, which are significantly larger than the Nationals’.
If you want to know the results of such rickety mergers, look no further than the business pages of any newspaper during the ’80s. You can’t turn a dud organisation into a good one by taking over a much larger one, you just end up destroying a lot of political capital.
Just when Peter Beattie is starting to look vulnerable with problems in power generation, a looming infrastructure crisis (see the SEQ Regional Plan), and proposals to dig up inner city areas for millionaire high rises (see the SEQ Regional Plan again), the non-Labor side take their eye off the ball, all through the desperate twistings of an entrepreneur trying to stave off political bankruptcy.
Maybe it’s time for those financing the National Party to cut their losses and cross the street to the Liberals. No point throwing good money after bad. As they used to say when I was in finance – your first loss is your best loss.



Posted by Graham at 2:33 pm | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 29, 2004 | Graham

We could do the ALP’s research for free; and it would be good for democracy



Recent reports say the ALP is looking for a new research outfit after their federal election loss. Well, they could do no better than appointing our blog www.ozelections.com and our On Line Focus projects as their official pollsters. We’ve been even-handedly doling out free advice to both sides of politics for three years now, and have hardly ever been wrong (or at least that’s what our self-publicist claims).
At times we know our research has had a high-level readership, like the Sunday afternoon I exchanged pleasant emails with former Labor Leader Simon Crean over one of our qualitative surveys.
What we are doing is no more than the media in general should be doing. But they’re not, which is more of a problem for minor parties than major parties. The majors will look at our site, and sniff, because you get what you pay for, and anyone can look at the site, so they pay their respective pollsters thousands to come (hopefully) to the same conclusion. The minor parties don’t have that option, but from where I sit seem to have a problem working out what advice in the public domain is good, and what isn’t. That’s probably because most of what the media publishes as political analysis is really just the retailing of gossip.
I find it ironic that in an era where information has become valuable as never before, and where trade in it is the highest as a proportion of GDP that it has ever been, much of it is of such low grade that its sale represents redistribution of wealth to journalists and media proprietors, rather than distribution of knowledge.
There are a number of reasons for that. One is the quality of journalists – it’s not very high; and is probably being made worse by a tendency to educate journalists to be journalists, rather than just to educate them. I’m of the opinion that in a lot of cases journalism and communications degrees are wasting the time of students that would be better spent studying real deep knowledge that might allow them to accurately interpret the facts.
I also believe that media organisations should be recruiting experts at the height of their careers and paying them commensurately, rather than schooling up young wannabes through a trade system. Recently I met the new business reporter for a major daily who was taking up her round in Canberra. “Did you study commerce or economics at Uni?” I asked. “Neither,” was the response. Needless to say our conversation didn’t dally over knowledgeable discussions of the difference between EBIT and EBITDA. What is she capable of doing except recycling public relations press releases?
Another problem is that for most proprietors, news is the colloid which contains the real gold in the medium – advertising. If your real business is not news, but selling advertising, then the news is going to expand to meet the amount of advertising available, and if there isn’t enough news to do that, then there is always “news”.
This morning we have just published an article by Justice Michael Kirby based loosely on the famous Martin Luther King speech – I have a dream. Well, I have a dream too – that the new electronic medium, which has driven the price of production, distribution, marketing and sales of news down to almost zero, will allow us to create a product where people will actually pay for the news, not expect to get it as a byproduct of advertising.
Perhaps then political parties won’t have to pay so much for what they know, and the rest of us might just know more. That would be a big boost to democracy.



Posted by Graham at 6:21 am | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 28, 2004 | Unknown

Over and Out



Just a quick note to say thanks to everybody who has read (and possibly enjoyed) my stuff since I started putting it up on this blog back in April of this year. It has mostly been fun, but time to move on. You can now find me at http://darlenetaylor.blogspot.com, where I will be putting all my old stuff up with some new stuff when time and creativity allow. Thanks to Graham Young, who is not a bad bloke for a Liberal (onya, comrade).



Posted by Unknown at 9:45 am | Comments (3) |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 20, 2004 | Unknown

Spammers: Get Bent



Well, like most bloggers (hate to call myself that because it sounds so uncool, man) I think it would be nice if the one I write for got more comments, although I am also quite content with the idea nobody is reading or if they are they couldn’t give a rats.
Lo and behold in the space of an hour or so our comments box went from 755 to 900 and something, which can only mean one thing: spam, spam, spam, spam, spam. This, I take it, is a problem most blogs have had to contend with. It is a horrible feeling when you open Movable Type and right there in front of you are links to innumerable, and sometimes criminal, porn sites under your post about the Queensland Liberals, whom you would never want to equate with nudie pictures.
As I said to Tim Dunlop (not that I know him, but a little name-dropping never hurt), it is a violation, and it is also quite disgusting to have something you have written in relation to sexualized violence find itself “debased” by this stuff.
Indeed, I have discovered Ambit Gambit (type “Ambit Gambit” into the international search engine) has found itself linked to a porn site on Google, with my post about abuses at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq now promoting a “teen lesbian” sex site.
To top it off (or tops off), one of the “teen lesbians” is called “Darlene”. Super! I swear it has been a long time since I have been either a teen or a lesbian, so it ain’t me. I don’t know if this has come about because of the spam situation, but I have sent an e-mail to Google and they have said they will investigate.
Hopefully, we will be following Tim Blair and others soon (now!) and inserting the numbers box, because I am sick of it, and I see no reason why we should keep wasting our time on these whatever you want to call them.
Visit www.nationalforum.com.au for totally unhot, unsexy, free fully clothed posts from a cynical thirty-something member of the ALP and an even older Liberal. No pics included.
So we know what women’s role is on porn sites: to kiss other girls for the pleasure of boys. Where are women in the legitimate (I use the term in a very loose way) world of blogs and the Internet? Given they are not that prominent here is a short list of some of the sites I like to have a look at from time to time:
Geekgirl Soon turning ten years young, this site was created by Rosiex and was the first feminist e-zine in Australia.
Feministe Intelligent and interesting blog
Bitch Website of the really good magazine that is available at Borders. Funny, smart, inclusive and not afraid to call it like it is.

Gempires
Just heard about this today. Generally hate confessional blogs with their narcissistic self-absorption (know enough people – including me – like that, don’t need to read about it), but she seems like a cheeky minx, which is a good quality in any gal.
Pretty Ugly Website that changes too rarely of zine that comes out not enough. Nevertheless, worth a look.
Well, that’ll do for now. If anyone knows of any others, tell me.
Darlene can be contacted at darlene@onlineopinion.com.au or go to http://darlenetaylor.blogspot.com



Posted by Unknown at 1:39 pm | Comments (4) |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 20, 2004 | Unknown

Darlene Dines Out With Super Sweet Janet



As I’ve been engaged with other things of late (“I’ll have what you’re having, Anna Nicole Smith”), I thought I would dig into my oeuvre this week (also known as the crap on my C drive) to see what hasn’t been inflicted on Ambit Gambit’s reader(s). What follows is an interview I did before I was stopped from doing them after I drunkenly told Bob Brown his politics would stop being so nutty after he found himself a nice girlfriend.
Unsurprisingly, The Bulletin has a much larger budget than this blog, which doesn’t have a budget at all. While Jennifer Byrne can take her interview subjects to fancy establishments like a renovated McDonald’s, my companion for the afternoon, Janet Albrechtsen from The Australian, will have to be satisfied with Swizzlers, a shocker of a joint in which to meet with such a sweet lady.
Neglect by Swizzlers’ staff (it’s self-serve, but I was too afraid to tell her) quickly incites Janet to blame ACTU heavy, Greg Combet, for employees sitting behind cash registers instead of waiting on important customers. Her thesis that socialism lives on in the hospitality industry is the only sensible analysis of lousy customer service I’ve heard.
“Comrade, get out of that kitchen and take the orders of a couple of conservative columnists”, she bellows.
Janet discusses the controversy surrounding her article, Fatherless Aussie Kids at Risk of Becoming Murderous Muslims, while we’re standing in the salad queue.
“Malcontents taking a literal approach to the research I cite”, she offers with more charity than her detractors deserve. “A French sociologist revealed children raised by single mothers are 150% more likely to practise extreme versions of Islam than those from normal families”.
No right-thinking person could dispute Janet’s interpretation of Dr Jacques Smith’s findings after reading that “Iranian children in Paris have more chance of retaining their religion than the general community”.
The forced frivolity coming from table four drowns out Janet’s appreciation of data I’ve lent from a German expert about ethnic youth gangs.
“That’s the funniest gag you’ve ever told”. Sharing a restaurant with David Koch and the Sunrise crew is never easy, and less so when you can’t laugh on cue and look uncomfortable like that blonde co-host manages so expertly to do. “Bloody hilarious, Kochy, I know why I made the switch”.
“Anyway”, I yell, “Professor Von Kliegel is coming to Australia when he beats that holocaust thing”.
Janet believes that prior to 1996 powerful leftists like Ray Martin silenced right-wing commentators. “Even today”, she postulates, “you can’t pick up a tabloid, turn on talk back or watch current affairs without being bombarded with the progressive illuminati”.
Those ABC chatterers must wonder what ratings they’d have if Janet had become co-host of Media Watch, rather than the object of David Marr’s unwanted attention. Disgruntled viewers can only imagine a national broadcaster where affirmative action for failed advertisers and authors doesn’t apply.
“Good evening, I’m Janet Albrechtsen and tonight I hurl insults at ego-inflated, self-anointed champion of un-Australian causes and fitness campaigns, Phillip Adams, before finally finishing off the career of infamous homosexual and judicial activist, Michael Kirby”.
The post-traumatic stress disorder I suffered after brunch with Adams back in the 1980s threatens to return with the mention of his name. Criticising black armband historians is tough when there’s a voice in your head insisting God doesn’t exist and The Adventures of Barry McKenzie is a major moment in cinema.
Sanity is restored when Janet says she’s a role model and an example to talented girls everywhere that positive discrimination is for feminists who’ll never make it on their own. The manager certainly shares the opinion that nobody does invective better than Ms Albrechtsen.
“You self-proclaimed, unaccountable social engineer; I wanted mud cake not a brownie with no icing on top”.
Janet’s thanks for the interview is an invite to a reading of Sticking It Up the Toffs, an analysis of the damaging influence of elites by former ABA Chair and Emeritus Professor David, or “Davo” to his mates, Flint. The event is being put on by Quadrant, where “artz” funding from the Australia Council goes to the forces of good and not a performance artist who thinks wearing nothing but an oversized doily is a statement against the patriarchy (“this doily is not just representative of women’s oppression, it is an oppressed woman”).
Aware I’m going to meet Piers Akerman for the first time, I ring the office and give the new cadet my job because a stint as Barrie Cassidy’s sensible sidekick on Insiders beckons.
Read my other luncheon date interviews with Amanda Vanstone and David Flint here.
Next time I actually talk to a person and not a politician, uppity monarchist or conservative columnist.
Darlene can be contacted at darlene@onlineopinion.com.au or go to http://darlenetaylor.blogspot.com



Posted by Unknown at 8:01 am | Comments Off on Darlene Dines Out With Super Sweet Janet |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 16, 2004 | Graham

Courier Mail plays Sancho Panza



Yesterday I commented on Lawrence Springborg’s Quixotic attempt to amalgamate the Queensland Liberal and National Parties. Today it seems only fair to comment on his accomplice – The Courier Mail. This morning’s front page of the CM runs with the headline “Anderson backs plan for merger” as you can see here:
Courier Mail front page 16_11_04
But when you read the article you find tucked away in the middle comments from the PM opposing the idea and crediting the federal success of the coalition to their separate identities (maybe he read yesterday’s post?). Anderson merely says the idea ought to be discussed. Now, if you were in the business of journalism, rather than campaigning, wouldn’t the headline, and the text, be more along the lines of “Howard opposes Springborg”?
The Courier has been eking this story out since mid-last week, every day quoting some new “senior” Liberal source in support of the idea, making it look like State Leader Bob Quinn is all on his own on this one. In fact there are many more “senior” sources who will tell them what a stupid idea this is, but they don’t appear to be making the telephone calls, or even reading the blog posts or On Line Opinion. Nick Ferrett and I don’t mind being ignored, but John Howard? He’s the capo di capi of “senior” sources!
At least the online editor had the sense to keep the “story” off the website, so you’ll have to go to your local newsagent and buy the paper to see exactly what I mean.



Posted by Graham at 10:14 am | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 15, 2004 | Graham

Springborg’s Pineapple Party defies the federal election result



Lawrence Springborg’s quest to merge the two non-Labor parties in Queensland is Quixotic in the full sense of the word. Not only is it doomed to failure, but it is misguided and represents a disconnect with reality. Nothing demonstrates this more than the results of the last federal election.
Under Springborg’s plan John Howard would not have won control of the Senate because there is no way that a fused party could have won the 4 Senate spots the coalition partners managed between them. Why should the parties adopt a policy that would actually rob them of seats?
Springborg says that the parties can’t win as separate entities. How does he justify this? In 1995 they ran separately and won government, just as they did in all the elections between 1957 and 1989. If anyone needed more contemporary evidence that the reason for the poor performance of the coalition parties in Queensland has nothing to do with their being separate entities, they need only look again at the last federal election and John Howard’s successful record.
Another fact demonstrated by the federal election result is that the Queensland National Party is in trouble. When you look at the senate results in the federal seats where the National Party has state representatives, their vote is higher than the Liberal Party’s in only three – Maranoa, Hinkler and Dawson. On the Gold and Sunshine Coasts the best result they could manage was 3%, in Fairfax. Their worst was 1.67% in Macpherson – no wonder Barnaby Joyce wants to base himself on the Gold Coast, they need all the help there that they can get.
Senate results are a good proxy for the underlying strengths of the parties because they are not distorted by candidates.
Springborg’s policy is nothing but a desperate lunge by the Nationals to take over the Liberal Party before anyone realises just how poorly the Nats are doing. The threat of his parliamentary colleagues to resign en masse if the proposal is not accepted by the Libs is probably just a realisation that if they don’t go voluntarily, the electorate will eventually make their redundancies involuntary.
They certainly have little chance of surviving if they are going to concentrate their energies on issues of form, like party organisation, while ignoring issues of substance, like policies and performance.



Posted by Graham at 2:18 pm | Comments (2) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 14, 2004 | Unknown

Assorted Election Ramblings: Because Laborites Never Let Go of the Past



During the Federal Election, Darlene had a bit to say, as well as to drink. For no extra price, here for the first time ever in one handy compilation are some edited extracts of some of her sycophantic and whiny ramblings, because as an ALP hackette she loves misery and nostalgia (“If only Mark was more like Gough, well not like Gough, if only he didn’t have anything to do with Gough really and he was more like Keating, well, not like Keating really, more like (insert Labor leader of choice here except Bob Hawke – nothing annoys your average Laborite more than success).
11 September 2004
“Speaking of bigoted nongs, Family First’s Percy Campbell has been trying to win over motorists in Ryan, although only straight ones, while trying to establish a stand-up career. Apparently, Perc amused himself no end by suggesting he needs a lady ultra-right winger to help him woo drivers, lest they think he and his male ‘companion’ are lefty woolly woofters. “As a family party, we don’t want to have two guys standing there. They might think we’re the Greens”, the unfunny fundamentalist reasoned. Alas, Family First is black and white on the outside and black and white on the inside.”
26 September 2004
“A rally against the Howard Government in King George Square in Brisbane today attracted over a thousand protestors.
During the demonstration, which coincided with the Liberal Party’s federal election campaign launch, speakers such as Senate candidate for the Socialist Alliance Sam Watson and Richard Neilsen from The Greens accused the Prime Minister of dishonesty over issues such as children overboard, the environment and the war in Iraq. A marcher named Dave thought “…it was time for the Howard Government to go and I think there is no way they should be holding a political forum in a public space”, while Ph.D. student Jen declared, “I don’t like Howard”.
The presence of four members of the Working People’s Coalition of Australia caused a minor stir after its leader claimed to “…hate communist scum”. The only other incident occurred after a female protestor tried to kick down the barricade surrounding City Hall.
Chas from The Chaser was last seen wearing an orange rat-catcher’s costume and looking for the rodent with a big brown head.”
2 October 2004
“It has been such a big campaign week for oldies that some of us are spending the weekend dozing over Lucy Turnbull’s letter about Malcolm, while the melodic sounds of Frenzal Rhomb’s Rock against Howard plays in the background.
According to Mabel, my best friend since Queen Victoria’s coronation, that whippersnapper with the potty mouth claims over-75s will be guaranteed a hospital bed if he forms government after the election.
“Holy”, I yelled at Mabel, but before I could say shit she told me in a disapproving tone that Labor will also bring in a national dental program.
“If you can’t afford to get your teeth fixed, you can’t afford to buy the sort of food that requires you have teeth”, Mabel reasoned.
Mabel, who never misses a chance to tell everybody she is a self-funded retiree who deserves more than pensioners who wasted their money on drugs, Bob Dylan records and communist party memberships rather than saving it, said she will be giving her vote to “John” this time because he is offering $200 to “contributing citizens”.
It’s not for me to remind Mabel, my best friend since the Boer War, that the only time she hasn’t voted Liberal was in 1972 in protest at the gown Mrs McMahon wore to the White House the previous year. “She’s no Mrs Howard, Violet, and he seems a bit, well, unusual”, she muttered at the time prior to ticking the box for the Democratic Labor Party (DLP).”
3 October 2004
“After failing to convince security staff I was a serious journalist and/or Liberal, I spent last Sunday at the anti-Howard rally outside the party’s campaign launch.
Let me tell you, it is not easy covering a demonstration hostile to conservatives when dressed in a frock Princess Di would have worn before her divorce, while carrying a bag with the Prime Minister’s face on it and a cardigan inside in case it got cold.
Unsurprisingly, Labor was not fussy about who it let in to its launch, so in I went with my notebook, biro, homemade media pass and membership card.
As a member, I was spared from sitting next to dodgy press types and instead found myself surrounded by representatives of the esteemed political class, including former leader Paul Keating, former leader Kim Beazley and current Senator Bob McMullen, who seemed impressed with my modest claim of being “just an ordinary branch member”.
In between playing spot the pollie; I paid a bit of attention to what was happening on stage, particularly when lovely Ms Lacy featured in what might have been a world first, an Australian wife recommending her husband to people.
Although deeply hurt by the Liberal Party’s rejection a few days earlier and an ALP hack since 1998, I resolved to adhere to my usual impartiality.
I can thus advise that Labor’s intention to index pensions four times a year and introduce income splitting are the best initiatives ever introduced in the history of humankind.”
9 October 2004
“Today I did what every self-respecting political party hack does on Election Day and slept until noon. Hang on; I actually engaged in that behaviour endured by humanity’s selfless and spent four hours handing out how-to-vote cards at a school in Brisbane. Even if noble of itself, I aim to use my experience to predict who will emerge victorious.
Interestingly, a number of voters took leaflets only from the major parties, which my research suggests has to do with the fact that the bigger size is more useful when wiping up sauce that has run from a P & C sausage sandwich to your Mark Latham: Opportunity for All t-shirt.
Alas, for the Baptist in possession of Family First Party paraphernalia and a pleasant personality, the recognition level for his controversial group was low. Thus it is my contention that Family First will only get one vote from the five-year-old who attempted to set their card alight in the hope of building a fire to burn some lesbians.
Since the lone Democrat was situated at a side entrance away from sober company, I have no way of gauging how dire their recognition level was so I will guess like opinion columnists are wont to do and say it was nothing, like their vote is bound to be.
Unfortunately, the Baptist and I were both targets for the Hanson-like views of an ageing Liberal with a chip on his shoulder so big he could keep members of the CFMEU in jobs for life (no, it wasn’t Graham).”
10 October 2004
“I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again…democracy simply doesn’t work.” -Kent Brockman
Without wanting to adopt a shrill Margo Kingston tone, the election result was shattering, outrageous, devastating, disappointing, bewildering and sad. Perhaps the fellow who stuck three (or was it two) fingers up in my face while I was handing out how-to-votes and said; “see you in three more years” summed it up.
Of course, the voters’ choice is to be respected, but why oh why we would go back to the bad old days of a major party with control, or near control, of the Senate. We can assume John Howard will be going to church today to thank the good Lord above, and ‘her/his’ political operatives on earth.
Speaking of the likes of Margo, which I was, I suspect the election result is just another indication of how out of touch most political commentators are.”
At this point Darlene would like to advertise the Straight Out of Brisbane festival, which is coming up soon. It features a range of things too numerous to mention. My friend and Spinster zine colleague, Carmen, will be speaking at an event with some lesser lights like Christian Kerr from Crikey and that youthful Merlin fellow from Big Brother, presumably without the mispelt sign. It’s important to support such things or we won’t have them anymore, just like the old days in Queensland when fun could only be had by making jokes about Joh’s speech patterns and visiting the Big Pineapple.
Darlene can be contacted at darlene@onlineopinion.com.au or go to http://darlenetaylor.blogspot.com



Posted by Unknown at 6:53 pm | Comments Off on Assorted Election Ramblings: Because Laborites Never Let Go of the Past |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 14, 2004 | Unknown

Nanabour Branch of the ALP – Part 2 – The Preselection



Since the author only admits to being an ALP member in impolite company and when appearing on our national broadcaster (“Yes, John Howard is just horrible, Phillip, sweetie”), it was with much courage and alcohol that she once again braved a local branch to find out what the party is like on the inside. What follows is the final of her two reports. Next week she infiltrates a Liberal function with a four-wheel drive, a Bronwyn Bishop make-over (“No, more foundation and pull the hair back tighter”) and a level of triumphalism the Prime Minister would find acceptable.
Present: Michael Michaelson-Michaels (President), Margaret Morton Michaelson-Michaels (Fundraising Director) and Steven Jones (Secretary)
Visitors: John “Number Cruncher” Stevenson (faction heavy and local florist), Administrative Committee Chair (“I’m not giving my name, mate“)
Apologies: Nope
Margaret: “Have you called everybody on the list?”
Michael: “No, I spent the past fortnight talking to my best girlfriend about what a spunk Anthony from Australian Idol is”.
Margaret: “You have a girlfriend?”
Michael: “You know I don’t, anymore.
“For two weeks, I’ve phoned people who were party members, but recently decided not to renew. I’ve had the pleasure of listening to all their fascinating reasons why: branch meetings are boring, the party doesn’t know what it stands for, the party does know what it stands for but doesn’t stand for the right things, Carmen Lawrence should be parliamentary leader, Carmen Lawrence is a loony left-winger and should be expelled, moan, groan, whine and what do they expect?
“I did get a couple of, if I can I have a job in your office I will vote for you but it’s a secret ballot so I can’t really tell you.
“If I didn’t need their vote, I wouldn’t talk to these people at all.
“Anyway, Steven’s here to take us to the polling booth.
“I wish Arthur hadn’t talked us into serving sausages. He’ll probably be the only one voting who doesn’t think souvlaki is standard fare: if only we could branch stack from closer to home”.
Steven: “How are you, Margaret?”
Margaret: “Worried about the preselection. How’s that woman you’re seeing?”
Steven: “To be honest, the other day she confessed her feelings for me and I had to let her down. I don’t know if I’ll be seeing her again”.
Margaret: “I don’t understand, you got on so well. I bet you rejected her because your dad said if you went out with a Liberal he would chop you up and make you the door prize at the next barbecue cum fundraiser cum chance for us to raffle those left-over scratchies: you know, the branch members love ’em”.
Michael: “Don’t worry about it, there’s no point in seeing some sheila who could ruin your career rather than help it. Julie from Banning Branch is a good sort and I think she might be a member of the Left and you know how unlucky they are with the opposite sex.
“Look there’s Mitchell, soon to be ex-Member for Nanabour. What the hell is he doing serving Falafels and Lasagne?”
John: “Don’t worry about it Michael, we’ve got administrative committee stitched up. We promised them we’d give the former Member for Kilroy a job when he gets out in three to five years time”.
Michael: “Is that all he got? Remind me to run a law and order campaign promising to lock up dodgy politicians and throw away the key. That should make me popular with the ordinary punter.
“Steven and Margaret can manage things down here. We better get down to party office for the real vote”.
Administrative Committee Chair: “G’day mate, how are you going?
“Mitchell isn’t turning up. We just have to wait for everybody to come back in. You know what it’s like in here when there are too many mobile phones going at the same time; tends to make that life-size poster of Hawke wilt from the lack of attention.
“Thanks for returning for the vote and for turning off your phones for the time it will take to decide who our next candidate for Nanabour will be.
(Two minutes and ten Greensleeves, two I Was Made for Loving You and one Waiting for the Great Leap Forward rings later)
Michael: “Mate, how the hell did we lose? You said we had it sewn up”.
John: “Mate, I tried my best but the numbers weren’t with you. Mate, I’ve got to go and have a chat to Mitchell about who he needs to give a job to and stuff like that. There’s a division in council you might like to have a go at. Think about it and give us a ring. You’ve got my mobile number, haven’t you…mate?”
Michael: “Bloody done over, mate!
“We’ll keep going with the branch and show members we don’t need the heavies to succeed”.
Steven: “Look mate, I’ve been offered a job with Mitchell so I don’t think I’ll have time for the branch anymore but if you want to give us a call and talk about your future that would be great. You’ve got my mobile number, haven’t you…mate?
Political career finished at 6.35pm, mate.
Darlene can be contacted at darlene@onlineopinion.com.au or go to http://darlenetaylor.blogspot.com



Posted by Unknown at 1:45 pm | Comments Off on Nanabour Branch of the ALP – Part 2 – The Preselection |
Filed under: Uncategorized
Older Posts »