Anidav posted:

Projected Senate composition in a double dissolution election
NSW Coalition 7, ALP 4, Greens 1
Vic Coalition 6, ALP 4, Greens 2
Qld Coalition 7, ALP 4, Greens 1
WA Coalition 7, ALP 4, Greens 1
Tas Coalition 6, ALP 4, Greens 2
SA Coalition 5, ALP 3, Greens 1, Xenophon 3
ACT Coalition 1, ALP 1
NT Coalition 1, ALP 1
Total: Coalition 40, ALP 25, Greens 8, Xenophon 3

Doctor Spaceman posted:

Not that specific report (I'm skimming through now), but replacing fuel excise with congestion pricing is a pretty standard suggestion. The general idea isn't to put tolls everywhere but in areas like city CBDs where you want to reduce traffic. It also has the benefit of accounting for hybrid or petrol-free cars.

E: There's a recommendation to start tracking heavy vehicles (via satellite etc) and charging them based on road usage, with the argument being that lots of these trucks are already tracked, that one truck causes more road damage than a thousand cars, and that successful similar schemes have been implemented elsewhere.

#thrBC posted:

Ballarat bishop agrees to be sued for historic sex abuse claims in lieu of dead predecessor

A Catholic bishop in regional Victoria has agreed to be sued for sex abuse claims dating back to the 1960s, standing in the place of his long-dead predecessor.

On January 1 a new set of guidelines came into effect, agreed to by the nation's 33 Catholic dioceses, and hundreds of religious orders.

They oblige all Church authorities to provide an entity for victims to sue, such as a trustee, even where the person responsible for overseeing the alleged abuse has since died.

In Ballarat, current bishop Paul Bird has volunteered to put himself forward as the defendant.

"In some way, the bishop carries the history of the community with them," Bishop Bird said.

"And so if the community, in a way, is going to address the history, they can do that in the most direct way, through the bishop at the time."

Bishop Bird's diocese has perhaps the worst record of clergy child abuse in the country, and the notorious paedophile priest Gerard Ridsdale is responsible for much of it.

Bishop Bird's stance means Ridsdale's early victims, abused when the former bishop James O'Collins was in charge up until 1971, can now sue the diocese.

"I've inherited the history of the community, for good and for ill, and therefore should be ready to address that history in so far as it needs to be addressed," Bishop Bird said.

"In some cases these may be covered by insurance, in other cases it would be the diocese itself that would have to meet any costs."

Amoeba102 posted:

Make drivers pay for the roads they use, tracked how? What put a toll both at the end of every street? The fuel excise is a way of making you pay for the driving you do that is relatively simple to implement. Without details it seems pretty dumb. Anyone read the report?

Amoeba102 posted:

I suppose that's one way, but it's different from how the article presented it. Problem with reporting, I guess.

Amoeba102 posted:

I suppose that's one way, but it's different from how the article presented it. Problem with reporting, I guess.

quote:

New South Wales Government Minister Brad Hazzard has come under pressure in Parliament over his dealings with a witness to the car accident that sparked a corruption inquiry into Crown Prosecutor Margaret Cunneen.

Key points:

Brad Hazzard confirmed a witness of the accident in Margaret Cunneen probe contacted him
He said he put the witness in touch with ICAC, but could not recall providing Ms Cunneen's phone number
The State Government's legal representative said Mr Hazzard has not done anything illegal

Under questioning from Labor, Mr Hazzard said a witness to the car accident contacted his office when he was attorney-general, after the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) announced it was investigating the incident.

Anidav posted:

Under the measures agreed to with both Katter's Australian Party MPs, convicted drug offenders can be banned from "Safe Night" precincts.

Anidav posted:

both Katter's Australian Party MPs, convicted drug offenders can be banned from "Safe Night" precincts.

open24hours posted:

Might as well have re-elected Newman.

Birb Katter posted:

Former Victoria Liberal Party state director Damien Mantach, 42, has pleaded guilty to 44 charges related to ripping off $1.5 million in party funds.

He appeared via videolink and will be back before Victoria's County Court in early May.

The money, raised through donations and other fundraising, was meant to be spent on the 2014 Victorian election, which saw the Liberal-National Coalition government lose office after just one term.

Cartoon posted:

Is there a Victorian State honours scheme. I'd like to nominate him for a gong.

norp posted:

Perhaps we should just low jack the whole country and track their location at all times.

Skellybones posted:

I don't know what sort of hole in particular but at least deep enough so that while standing in it, his head would be below ground level.

Anidav posted:

It should make fortitude valley safer right???

Anidav posted:

The Turnbull government would seize a rare, absolute majority in the Senate if it finalises a deal on voting reform and calls a double-dissolution election, according to two experts on the preference system.
The Greens - who are negotiating with the Coalition to end "preference harvesting" among minor parties - would likely lose two of its current 10 senators if it agrees to support reforms and both houses of Parliament are dissolved.
A review of voting data by Graham Askey and Peter Breen, veteran players in minor party preference negotiations, forecasts the Coalition would win 40 Senate seats - a gain of seven - while Labor would remain anchored at 25 under the proposed changes being sought by the government.

Antony Green posted:

Could voting reform lead to the Coalition winning a Senate majority at a double dissolution? It is a claim that has set the dogs running this morning after analysis by the Renewable Energy Party claimed it would. (See Sydney Morning Herald article here.) The claim is the Coalition would win 7 of the 12 vacancies in three states delivering the Turnbull government a Senate majority.

It is a claim that doesn't stand up to analysis.

First let me point out that the self-interest here on the part of the two who have done the analysis, Peter Breen and Graham Askey. Both are part of the Renewable Energy Party, a micro-party currently applying for registration. Both have been involved in previous micro-parties and Breen was one of the micro-party members elected from the famous 1999 NSW Legislative Council tablecloth ballot paper. Breen, along with preference 'whisperer' Glenn Druery, worked briefly on the staff of Victorian Motoring Enthusiast Senator Ricky Muir after his surprise election in 2013.

So Breen has some self-interest in opposing the suggested Senate reform as it would destroy the micro-party business model.

Let me deal with the suggestion that the Coalition can win 7 seats in a single state.

To elect six Senators at a double dissolution, the Coalition would need to reach 46.2% of the first preference vote. If they poll more than 46.2%, they have a candidate in the race for a seventh seat, but realistically the Coalition would need close to 50% of the first preference vote to elect seven Senators. But if the Coalition poll less than 46.2% of the vote, it would be impossible for it to elect seven members from a single ticket. For Breen to claim the Coalition will win seven seats in NSW, Queensland and WA is to say the party will poll more than 46.2% of the vote.

How often has the Coalition done that at Senate elections? Here's the list of first preference Coalition votes above 46.2% since 1990.

Queensland 1996 50.3%
Western Australia 1990 46.2%
Western Australia 1993 50.1%
Western Australia 1996 47.5%
Western Australia 2004 50.2%
Western Australia 2007 47.7%
Western Australia 2010 46.4%
South Australia 2004 47.5%

The above cases are the only instances in the last quarter century where the Coalition could have won seven seats at a double dissolution, yet Breen and Askey are claiming it will happen in three states in 2016, including NSW and Victoria. If the Liberals and Nationals ran separate tickets in WA and Queensland, they could in special circumstances get an extra Senate seat by splitting their vote across two tickets. This was how the Coalition won four seats in Queensland at the 2004 half-Senate election.

Yet in their analysis, Breen and Askey claim that Labor and the Greens risk losing seats to a single Coalition ticket because of split votes, so it would be odd to reverse the argument and say splitting votes wouldn't disadvantage the Coalition.

In his argument explaining why Labor and the Greens could help the Coalition, Breen quotes a half-Senate race where Labor and the Greens split the 'left' vote and allow the Coalition to win, but he assumes the Coalition would get 53.6% of the vote.

Let's face facts. If the Coalition get the 50% of the vote to win seven Senate seats in NSW, Victoria and WA, then the Turnbull government would be returned to office with a massive House majority.

Under both the current and the proposed electoral system, a party would come close to winning seven Senate seats if its vote was above 50%. This system is proportional representation, and if a party gets more than half of the vote, there is always a reasonable chance it will get a proportionate outcome which is more than half the seats.

The current Senate electoral system could just as easily produce the same result. However, you would have to work out the labyrinthine preference flows and factor in the random factors produce by voters needing to use magnifying glasses on the over-sized ballot papers in under-sized fonts.

Doctor Spaceman posted:

Solemn Sloth posted:

Weird that a guy who makes his money from shuffling micro party preferences would release a report scaring the greens away from abolishing micro party preferencing

Zenithe posted:

Brisgoons, anyone have good experiences doing their RSA, preferably online? Looking to do one and a lot look dodgy.

Welsper posted:

They're all dodgy, but RSA/RSG is such a joke of a cert that it doesn't matter. Anything which has the RTO logo on its cert is fine. Go with the cheapest one.

Welsper posted:

RSA/RSG is such a joke

MonoAus posted:

Just a radical thought here but maybe there should be a focus on making RSAs not a joke instead of having lockouts etc.

I'm not sure why they even bother with them at the moment.