Thanks Antony, for your prompt reply
It is most encouraging, and much more than we get from Des O'Shea or his
colleagues, like Don Schultz. They remain silent, in the face of an
increasing barrage of questions. You personally are certainly helping
Justice Murray Gleesen's cause, that: "The democratic and lawful means of
securing change, if change be necessary, is an expression of the will of an
informed electorate." I expect a majority of all ABC employees are as
concerned about democracy and the rule of law, as we are. With your help,
they can greatly improve the chances to do far more than help Mr O'Shea.
If you read all of my submission to the Governor of Queensland, you would
have noticed that I quoted you, and denied any authority for what you
described (see below), and I am more than happy to debate this. However,
the issue which most concerns me, is that the simple but profound
"democratic truth" (that DEMOCRATIC, FREE and FAIR elections, can FAIL) has
been suppressed for centuries (and in Queensland since 1892, when
preferential voting was 1st introduced!) That's very significant, isn't it?
Extract from my submission (Lawful Process of Elections or
Disenfranchisement of Voters) to the Governor of Queensland:
The phrase "remaining in the count" is being (and may have previously been)
dishonestly and UNLAWFULLY re-interpreted as authority to optionally
disenfranchise voters for not preferring ‘remaining’ candidates, so that
candidates with less than a “majority of the first preference votes" can be
‘elected’.
Not surprisingly, there is nothing in the Act to authorise exclusion of
exhausted formal ballot papers from the count of "votes remaining in the
count", and the idea that ballots of voters expressing no preference for
candidates remaining in the count can be admitted to first counts, but
optionally removed from subsequent counts, is so utterly repugnant to
democracy and the much-touted term "fair elections", that I expect Mr O'Shea
is not a willing agent of such subversion of democracy, but is intimidated
by others with stronger, more direct interests in suppressing the democratic
truth that democratic, free, and fair elections can fail.
So Antony, lets keep debating and spreading the truth, but in a public
arena, where His Honour Justice Murray Gleesen, Chief Justice of the High
Court of Australia, would insist it belongs. Will ABC radio and/or TV agree
to this? Then we could both explain on air the intended/actual
disenfranchisement of the Kawana One Nation supporters, whose 2080 exhausted
ballots have been reclassified from valid in the first count, to invalid in
the second count. Perhaps Des O'Shea could join us, or, if still too busy,
could put Don on stand-by to respond.
There will certainly be at least one other Queensland electorate required to
soon make another informed expression of their will. A majority of voters
in Surfers Paradise have already been denied their choice of 17 February,
and should be most interested to hear the ABC broadcast the above sort of
debate, and have the new candidates participate in it, or at least respond.
What do you think? Shouldn't Kawana and other electorates where elections
failed to produce a majority in February, also make another, and much more
informed, expression of their will? Should the ABC help such electors hear
informed debate of the simple but still suppressed "democratic truth"?
Perhaps Don can tell us when the writs for the Surfers Paradise by-election
are issued.
Regards, and looking forward to a reply - by phone (or can I call you?)
Jim Stewart
Phone:+617 3411 7646
Mobile: 04 1427 4420 (voice-mail)
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/public-list@neither.org
