The responses to my 'Evidence of disenfranchisement, and real chances to do
far more than help Mr O'Shea' has been most encouraging, and I hope others
are trying to help the Governor of Queensland fulfil his sworn duty. The
address is mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
However as I wrote to Antony, 612 ABC, and Don Schultz, to promote 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." we need keep debating and spreading the truth in a public
arena, like the ABC. In the circumstances not only do ABC radio and/or TV
have public duties to this, but doing so would rapidly revive public support
for it, both in and beyond Queensland.
However, I think it worth forwarding the following response from Peter
Gargan to a few of you who are showing interest and understanding. Please
lets inform as many electorates as possible. suppressing the democratic
truth that democratic, free, and fair elections can fail is relevant to
Ryan, its just that Canberra pretends voting is unfree, while the ECQ
wants(?) unfair voting - optional preferences, but optional counting too!
-----Original Message-----
From: Colin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, 1 March 2001 7:38 PM
To: Jim Stewart
Subject: Re: Evidence of disenfranchisement, and real chances to do far
more than help Mr O'Shea
Hi Jim, I am Peter Gargan, a law student at JCU who also ran as a ON
candidate in Cairns.
Your email is interesting. Did the ECQ exclude 2000 ON votes from the
second count to give the seat to Labor, because there was only 1 on
them? If so a Petition is in Order.
If so, and you live in the electorate and have $400 and bugger all else,
then a challenge is in order.
A seat by seat analysis of the just Vote One campaign by the Labor Party
reveals that the introduction of optional preferential voting has
granted the ALP perhaps 20 seats they are not entitled to on equitable
grounds. Enough to make them honest at least.
Equity looks to the intent rather than the form, and the intent of
voting just 1, cannot be to force upon your fellow electors, a candidate
neither they nor you want. The intent is of course to follow the HTV
card of the person you put 1.
Section 154 Electoral Act 1992 , False, misleading or incomplete
documents, may apply to a goodly number of ALP members who displayed
the Just Vote 1 signs during the election. The display of that sign,
without a warning that form cannot be used to defeat substance, can
arguably constitute an attempt to utter a false. misleading or
incomplete document.
Likewise, a Liberal or National How to Vote card, uttered at a booth
without a warning that to put the ALP ahead of One Nation could result
in a Labor Government, constitutes an uttering of a false and
misleading and incomplete document. If a Liberal stands against a Labor
Candidate then the intent is to defeat that candidate, not elect
him/her.
The penalty on conviction, of an offence against Section 154 is the
vacation of a members seat under the Section 7(2) Legislative Assembly
Act 1876. A new election may be preferred by the ALP.
On a seat by seat basis:
Application of equity to the count would see:
Barron River go to Sno Bonneau.
Beaudesert Lingard; If he put One Nation last, then he could be
convicted and disqualified.
Burdekin: NPA to win.
Burleigh If One Nation preferences go to to Smith NPA win.
Burnett One Nation denied a candidate by late registration. Retry.
Charters Towers National to win.
Glasshouse: New election. No clear majority.
Hervey Bay: One Nation to win.
Ippswich West One Nation to win.
Kawana Liberal to win unless on Labor Preferences.
Logan One Nation denied candaidate retry
Redland: no clear majority retry
Springwood No clear majority: denied candidate :
Thuringowa; no absolute majority; no clear candidate: One Nation denied
candidate. Retry
Toowoomba North No clear majority One Nation denied candidate.
Whitsunday No clear majority: NPA or C C A to win.
In addition:
Mulgrave: False and misleading tactics: Vot eOne without a warning that
Equity will deem the Vote to follow the HTV card.
Mundingburra: Same grounds.
Mugerraba: Same grounds
In 1991 the Anti Discrimination Act 1991 , was passed into Queensland
law, and that law in Section 101, provides that discrimination in any
government program whatsoever is unlawful.
It says a person who- performs any function or exercises any power
under State Law must not discriminate in --- The performance of the
function or the exercise of the power, or the carrying out of the
responsibility.
The Act was passed to signify that Queensland is obliged to respect the
principles of dignity and equality for everyone. The Electoral Act
1992 (Q) says , in Section 113 (2) that there can be two classes of
elector in Queensland, those who vote just 1, and those who mark
preferences. The people who mark their preferences are being
discriminated against by allowing a vote, which has only one mark on it,
to be treated as equal to theirs.
This pretence has, in Barron River resulted in an elected representative
who is probably unable to prove the support of a majority of electors.
It is quite alright to talk about voting rorts, but when in Barron
River, on figures published on Monday by the Electoral Commission,
12,583 electors expressed a first preference for someone else than Dr
Lesley Clark. She cannot claim to be the legitimate choice.
Exhausted votes are a legal fiction, and a fraud. If a person votes 1
then that person intends to follow the How To Vote card of the person
they put one. The intent of the voters in Barron River was crystal
clear. They do not want Dr Lesley Clark. Equity looks to the intent.
rather than the form. To call a vote informal after only reading One,
is to use form to defeat intent.
Eliminate all exhausted votes, or eliminate none. To eliminate
exhausted votes cast for Peter Starr, Lyn Warwick, Sno Bonneau, and
Kevin Walls, and not eliminate the exhausted votes from Dr Lesley Clark
is discriminatory.
With Peter Starr one vote behind Lyn Warwick, and Sno Bonneau ahead of
both of them, by some 600 votes, a distribution of preferences done
without discrimination, should see Peter Starrs preferences flow to
Sno, Lyn Warwicks also flow to Sno, and the new member for Barron River
should be Sno Bonneau. If the bulk of Kevin Walls preferences flowed to
Dr Clark, it would still not be enough.
It is time someone went to the Court of Disputed Returns and insisted
the Electoral Commissioner desisted from discriminatory practices in
counting votes, and obtain a recount of the votes in Barron River with
the object of returning a legitimate representative.
The Court, under Section 136 (1) Electoral Act 1992, may make any order
the court considers just and equitable. It is just and equitable that
the majority of electors in Barron River must not be made to suffer an
unwanted representative, due to an electoral rort. Equitable principles
make it clear the electors want someone other than Dr Lesley Clark. The
court must make orders that give effect to the will of the people, even
if it must call a new election, with Section 113 (2) Electoral Act 1992
eliminated from the scene. Then a true representative will be elected.
----------------------------------------------------------------
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
