Who is the 'Average' Australian voter?

Remove this Banner Ad

So you want politicians who won't abide by their own Ministerial Charter to remedy the ABC?

I feel we should fix politics rather than use politics to excuse failings elsewhere including the ABC
 

Log in to remove this ad.

IF you read what was said, if the Board does not have the power, the Government should remedy that, aka give the Board the power to enforce the ABC Charter.
Happy to fund the national broadcaster, its a 2 way street, the Charter outlines the 't's & c's'.

More muddying of the waters.
Not printing RW garbage to placate the RWFWs is not a breach of the ABC Charter regardless of how many RWFWs claim it is.
The ABC has been under intense scrutiny for the last decade, only because RWFWs in govt think it should be disbanded.
In that decade of increased scrutiny, has there been a breach of its Charter? NO!!!
In that decade how many govt Ministers have rorted?
It is no more than a RWFW talking point that the ABC is in any way breaching its Charter.
 

E Shed

Fremantle Obsessive
Sep 10, 2006
21,556
42,119
Perth WA
AFL Club
Fremantle
More muddying of the waters.
Not printing RW garbage to placate the RWFWs is not a breach of the ABC Charter regardless of how many RWFWs claim it is.
The ABC has been under intense scrutiny for the last decade, only because RWFWs in govt think it should be disbanded.
In that decade of increased scrutiny, has there been a breach of its Charter? NO!!!
In that decade how many govt Ministers have rorted?
It is no more than a RWFW talking point that the ABC is in any way breaching its Charter.
Indeed. What goes on by a few here is just another false equivalence.
That somehow Murdoch's paid for, partisan hate and fear mongering is necessary to provide balance to the biased left ABC when every review that has ever been conducted finds no evidence of bias at the ABC and in fact recent reviews have found it favouring the conservative side of politics.

FFS the job of the media partly, is to hold power to account. The coalition has been in power for 13 years so of course they're the ones getting their chestnuts roasted occasionally. The problem is this government and the financial interests that sponsor them do not want to be held accountable for the gross level of corruption occurring nationally in Australia so they have created a bunch of straw men to the effect the ABC is biased and continued to defund them at every opportunity while handing Murdoch free money at every budget.

Newscorp meanwhile lurches further and further into RW crazy territory, increases its reach into free to air, social media and goes about propagating fear and division while running block for the incumbent government and attacking the opposition at every opportunity.

The Lib/Nats are systematically removing all mechanisms of accountability the latest being the auditor for having the temerity to point out they are rorting every single grant program. The ABC is just another enemy of grift to be gotten rid of.
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
More muddying of the waters.
Not printing RW garbage to placate the RWFWs is not a breach of the ABC Charter regardless of how many RWFWs claim it is.
The ABC has been under intense scrutiny for the last decade, only because RWFWs in govt think it should be disbanded.
In that decade of increased scrutiny, has there been a breach of its Charter? NO!!!
In that decade how many govt Ministers have rorted?
It is no more than a RWFW talking point that the ABC is in any way breaching its Charter.

Sadly you actually believe that nonsense & repeat it. THink for yourself.
 
Sadly you actually believe that nonsense & repeat it. THink for yourself.

What nonsense?
The only people that promote the idea that the ABC breaches its Charter are RWFW.
David Speers heads one of its headline political programs. David Speers, formerly of Sky.

You're just here parrotting some more Murdoch lines, as per usual.
When will you actually post something that isn't a regurgitation of Murdoch garbage? When?
 
Last edited:
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
What nonsense?
The only people that promote the idea that the ABC breaches its Charter are RWFW.
David Speers heads one of its headline political programs. David Speers, formerly of Sky.

You're just hear parrotting some more Murdoch lines, as per usual.
When will you actually post something that isn't a regurgitation of Murdoch garbage? When?

Got a link?
 
What nonsense?
The only people that promote the idea that the ABC breaches its Charter are RWFW.
David Speers heads one of its headline political programs. David Speers, formerly of Sky.

You're just hear parrotting some more Murdoch lines, as per usual.
When will you actually post something that isn't a regurgitation of Murdoch garbage? When?
Never. I’d hope that was a rhetorical question.
 
Last edited:

Ohitsthatguy

Premiership Player
Feb 18, 2017
4,388
5,829
AFL Club
Brisbane Lions
The average Australian voter doesn't really have time for politics. They have a house, a family, they are apathetic to it.

But some guy at work watched Sky and told them that Labor will raise taxes if they get in.
 
Nov 14, 2020
1,166
1,496
AFL Club
Carlton
What nonsense?
The only people that promote the idea that the ABC breaches its Charter are RWFW.
David Speers heads one of its headline political programs. David Speers, formerly of Sky.

You're just hear parrotting some more Murdoch lines, as per usual.
When will you actually post something that isn't a regurgitation of Murdoch garbage? When?
Spears is the only one at the ABC who is prepared to put the hard questions to Labor, as was evidenced last week on the Insiders. Every time a Labor politician comes on they just take cheap shots at the Govt. The current ALP team reminds me of an aging AFL team past its best. Albanese, Chalmers, Wong, Shorten, Plibersek Dreyfus, Butler...all been around a long time, and have achieved nothing but ensuring they live on a fat pension.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Spears is the only one at the ABC who is prepared to put the hard questions to Labor, as was evidenced last week on the Insiders. Every time a Labor politician comes on they just take cheap shots at the Govt. The current ALP team reminds me of an aging AFL team past its best. Albanese, Chalmers, Wong, Shorten, Plibersek Dreyfus, Butler...all been around a long time, and have achieved nothing but ensuring they live on a fat pension.

Yes, we should question the opposition about what they might plan to do in the distant, unknown future.....and not worry about asking questions of the actual govt. Sound plan, if it wasn't such a load of s**t.
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
I'd rather see an federal ICAC.

Good to see the NSW ICAC stood up in the rerun of the Eddie Obeid/Ian McDonald appeal:

This week’s conviction of former NSW ministers Ian Macdonald and Eddie Obeid, along with Obeid’s son Moses, is a major achievement.
It shows that the justice system can provide a fair trial for public figures despite immense prejudicial publicity.

But that achievement has also highlighted institutional flaws that caused ludicrous delays in bringing these men to justice.

Instead of giving priority to the prompt enforcement of the law, the case against the Obeids and Macdonald was subjected to a fractured system in which delays were inevitable. Different institutions applied different rules.

The conduct that gave rise to this week’s convictions took place up to 14 years ago and was reported to authorities more than a decade ago.

A large part of the responsibility for this delay must rest with the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption. One of its own reports shows it received a tip-off in February, 2011, and only produced a report on the Obeids and Macdonald two years and five months later in July, 2013.

Some have described this week’s convictions as a triumph for ICAC. A letter to the editor of this newspaper even said it had strengthened the case for a federal ICAC. Neither is true.
The only triumph is that of Justice Elizabeth Fullerton. She used all the tools at her disposal in a determined effort to ensure Macdonald and the Obeids received a fair trial.
She was worried about the prejudicial impact on potential jurors of the massive adverse publicity that was clearly related to accusations at an ICAC public hearing and the equally sensational media coverage.
In September, 2019, Fullerton was still intent on having this matter dealt with in the normal manner – by a jury. So she issued a temporary stay order because of what she said was “an unacceptable risk that the right of each of the accused to a fair trial would be prejudiced because of the intensity, proximity and nature of the pre-trial publicity where the accused are referred to in adverse terms”.
In December, 2019, the frenzy had not subsided and had even gained impetus because of a separate ICAC inquiry. Fullerton reluctantly ordered a judge-alone trial.
“The notoriety of the accused Edward Obeid and Mr Macdonald, and the opprobrium with which their affairs continue to be reported upon in the media (largely, it would seem, triggered by the recent [unrelated] ICAC inquiries which are current and continuing) is productive of what I consider to be a very real risk of a prospective juror being actually infected by the media coverage to date, or an equally real risk that further coverage of matters of public importance where the accused are named, or their conduct referenced, will result in the trial being aborted after it commences,” Fullerton’s judgment says.
Moses Obeid. Picture: Jane Dempster Moses Obeid. Picture: Jane Dempster
This judge felt duty-bound to delay the case and then preside without a jury in order to protect the right to a fair trial. She was right to do so. The public prejudice generated by ICAC was real, long-lasting and threatened this trial.
This gives rise to two issues: is it responsible for the NSW parliament to allow ICAC to intentionally generate community prejudice that has an impact on potential jurors when it is foreseeable that the people concerned are likely to face jury trials? A journalist who did that would face contempt proceedings.
And why should judges be required to change or delay court processes to accommodate ICAC’s desire for publicity? Real trials are more important than show trials.

We are yet to learn whether Macdonald and the Obeids will appeal. As recent cases have shown, public damnation of those convicted of serious offences is best reserved until the entire legal process is concluded.

But some things are already clear: if the Morrison government proceeds with a federal ICAC it should be an integrated and orthodox part of the justice system that adheres to the same rules. Based on this case, the alternative is inconsistency, investigations that run for years and more threats to the right to a fair trial.
The NSW system should be avoided. In that state, coercion, publicity, prejudice and show trials are more important to some policymakers than the community’s expectation that wrongdoers like the Obeids and Macdonald will be brought before a court and dealt with promptly.

Delays of this magnitude are bad enough when they affect the guilty. But what if they were to affect the innocent?


 
Good to see the NSW ICAC stood up in the rerun of the Eddie Obeid/Ian McDonald appeal:

This week’s conviction of former NSW ministers Ian Macdonald and Eddie Obeid, along with Obeid’s son Moses, is a major achievement.
It shows that the justice system can provide a fair trial for public figures despite immense prejudicial publicity.

But that achievement has also highlighted institutional flaws that caused ludicrous delays in bringing these men to justice.

Instead of giving priority to the prompt enforcement of the law, the case against the Obeids and Macdonald was subjected to a fractured system in which delays were inevitable. Different institutions applied different rules.

The conduct that gave rise to this week’s convictions took place up to 14 years ago and was reported to authorities more than a decade ago.

A large part of the responsibility for this delay must rest with the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption. One of its own reports shows it received a tip-off in February, 2011, and only produced a report on the Obeids and Macdonald two years and five months later in July, 2013.

Some have described this week’s convictions as a triumph for ICAC. A letter to the editor of this newspaper even said it had strengthened the case for a federal ICAC. Neither is true.
The only triumph is that of Justice Elizabeth Fullerton. She used all the tools at her disposal in a determined effort to ensure Macdonald and the Obeids received a fair trial.
She was worried about the prejudicial impact on potential jurors of the massive adverse publicity that was clearly related to accusations at an ICAC public hearing and the equally sensational media coverage.
In September, 2019, Fullerton was still intent on having this matter dealt with in the normal manner – by a jury. So she issued a temporary stay order because of what she said was “an unacceptable risk that the right of each of the accused to a fair trial would be prejudiced because of the intensity, proximity and nature of the pre-trial publicity where the accused are referred to in adverse terms”.
In December, 2019, the frenzy had not subsided and had even gained impetus because of a separate ICAC inquiry. Fullerton reluctantly ordered a judge-alone trial.
“The notoriety of the accused Edward Obeid and Mr Macdonald, and the opprobrium with which their affairs continue to be reported upon in the media (largely, it would seem, triggered by the recent [unrelated] ICAC inquiries which are current and continuing) is productive of what I consider to be a very real risk of a prospective juror being actually infected by the media coverage to date, or an equally real risk that further coverage of matters of public importance where the accused are named, or their conduct referenced, will result in the trial being aborted after it commences,” Fullerton’s judgment says.
Moses Obeid. Picture: Jane Dempster Moses Obeid. Picture: Jane Dempster
This judge felt duty-bound to delay the case and then preside without a jury in order to protect the right to a fair trial. She was right to do so. The public prejudice generated by ICAC was real, long-lasting and threatened this trial.
This gives rise to two issues: is it responsible for the NSW parliament to allow ICAC to intentionally generate community prejudice that has an impact on potential jurors when it is foreseeable that the people concerned are likely to face jury trials? A journalist who did that would face contempt proceedings.
And why should judges be required to change or delay court processes to accommodate ICAC’s desire for publicity? Real trials are more important than show trials.

We are yet to learn whether Macdonald and the Obeids will appeal. As recent cases have shown, public damnation of those convicted of serious offences is best reserved until the entire legal process is concluded.

But some things are already clear: if the Morrison government proceeds with a federal ICAC it should be an integrated and orthodox part of the justice system that adheres to the same rules. Based on this case, the alternative is inconsistency, investigations that run for years and more threats to the right to a fair trial.
The NSW system should be avoided. In that state, coercion, publicity, prejudice and show trials are more important to some policymakers than the community’s expectation that wrongdoers like the Obeids and Macdonald will be brought before a court and dealt with promptly.

Delays of this magnitude are bad enough when they affect the guilty. But what if they were to affect the innocent?


In other news the wheels of justice are glacial. I'm sure victims of crime could mount a similar argument and I don't see the Oz arguing their corner all that often.
 
Aug 14, 2011
44,794
16,853
Trafalgar
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Mclaren Mercedes F1
In other news the wheels of justice are glacial. I'm sure victims of crime could mount a similar argument and I don't see the Oz arguing their corner all that often.

Not sure why its about The Aus, its a Federal ICAC concept that is rattled by the opponents of one. Here is that discredited model delivering, be interesting to see how slow other commentators are.
 
Dec 18, 2007
10,973
6,790
Counting premiership cups
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Non that play Essendon
I doubt the average voter actually exists because Australia's political landscape is very demographically diverse.

A few elections ago, I read that statistically the most middle Australian electorate was Wills in Melbourne's north.
 
Nov 14, 2020
1,166
1,496
AFL Club
Carlton
I doubt the average voter actually exists because Australia's political landscape is very demographically diverse.

A few elections ago, I read that statistically the most middle Australian electorate was Wills in Melbourne's north.
15 seats decide any election. The rest go to plan. This is why both Parties pander to a particular demographic that is sitting in a marginal seat.
 
Back