An Opposition-Run Senate


The Liberal Party has effectively given up on winning the House of Representatives in the 18th May Election. Instead it is throwing everything at control of the Senate. Hence the Nats preferencing ON and the Libs preferencing Clive Palmer.

Should they succeed in that aim, then they can obstruct all ALP legislation. Anyone remember the “Dismissal’?

So how is the Senate going to appear after this election? I looked into my crystal ball and, through the haze, I thought I gained some knowledge. Then again, perhaps these old eyes mis-interpreted what they saw.

How will the Senate be elected?

The number of votes in a quota for each state varies according to the size of the electorate. For a simple Senate election such as this, the quota is, as near as damn is to swearing, 14.28% (1/7th) of the vote.

This is where the skill of ‘Preference whisperers’ comes in – for instance, they find twenty candidates each of whom may get an average of 0.7% (20×0.7 = 14%) and have the preferences swapped among them all. No one knows which of the group will be elected but if their total exceeds 14.28% then ONE of them will be elected. 0.7% in NSW translates to around 30,000 votes. In Western Australia it is about 9,500 and in Tasmania it is 2,400 votes.

Who is staying in the senate? I have abbreviated unconscionably in these little chartlets, both with party names and State names.

LP – N 3 Q 1 S 1 T 3 V 2 W 3 +2 Tot 15
ALP – N 3 Q 2 S 2 T 2 V 2 W 2 +2 Tot 15
PHON – Q 1 Tot 1
Nats – Q 1 V 1 Tot 2
AG – Q 1 T 1 V 1 W 1 Tot 4
CA – S 2 Tot 2
AC – S 1 Tot 1
TOTAL – N 6 Q 6 S 6 T 6 V 6 W 6 NT 2 ACT Tot 40

So the Coalition has 17/40, the ALP/Greens have 19/40 leaving oddballs 6/40. Note that there are 2 walk-ups each for the ALP and LNP in the Nt and ACT

Retiring senators
LP – N 1 Q 1 S 3 T 1 V 2 W 2 Tot 10
ALP – N 1 Q 2 S 1 T 3 V 2 W 2 Tot 11
PHON – W 1 Tot 1
NATS – N 1 Q 1 T 1 Tot 3
AG – N 1 Q 1 S 1 T 1 V 1 W 1 Tot 6
LDP – N 1 Tot 1
UAP – N 1 Tot 1
IND – Q 1 S 1 Tot2
DHJP – V 1 Tot 1

The Coalition (LP + Nats) has 13 seats up for election, ALP/Greens have 17 and oddballs 6.

There are a total of 76 Senators so to control the Senate, one side or the other will need a minimum of 39 Senators.

The Senate has been relatively stable over a number of elections. The 2016 election was an exception as it was a double dissolution and with a smaller quota (around 7%) which meant there was a larger number of small party Senator elected.

So this is where things become difficult. How many of those small party Senators will survive? And where will their seats go? Any OddBalls (ON, LDP, UAP, IND, DHJP and IND) elected will almost certainly vote with the Coalition. In general, in normal times, when voters do the expected, a State’s senate seats split three to either Lib or Lab, two to Lab or Lib and one either to the major who only won two of the first five seats determined OR (and this is key) one to a minor party. Often Green but sometimes a One Nation or a Nick Xenophon or a Clive Palmer spoils the party.

If we assume a return to normality then we can assign two seats each to the Libs and Labs in each state. This will lift each of them from 15 seats to 27 seats each with 12 seats unallocated (remember there are 4 Greens and 6 Oddballs already there).

State by State for the remaining seats based on the past but excluding 2016,

Tasmania; it is probable they will elect a Green and a Lib in positions 5 and 6. So – Libs 3, ALP 2, Greens 1

Western Australia; has a history of electing a Lib in 5th position, leaving 6th to Lab, Greens and One Nation. I hope the Greens (Jordon Steele-John) hang on here but worry about the City Labor vote. The flow between One Nation and United Australia needs to be watched closely. Hopefully each will only gain 6%. – So, Libs 3, Lab 3.

Victoria, Probably a Lib and a Green so Libs 3, Lab 2, Greens 1 although the Andrews effect could give a Lib seat to Lab. One to watch closely.

South Australia; Noted for the Xenophon effect and a traditional 3 Liberal Seat State, I would expect a Lib to win the 5th seat leaving the 6th for a Green (Sarah Hanson-Young) or a stray oddball. Giving 3 Libs, 2 Lab and 1 Green.

New South Wales; Traditionally 2 Libs, 2 Lab and one Nat so the 5th seat will probably go to the Nats. The NSW sixth seat is possibly the most open in this election. Greens, ON, UAP, Lib and Lab all have a chance of winning it. I’m tipping UAP because of the loss of confidence in the Nats which will hurt ON. This could turn out to be 2 Libs, 2 Lab, one Nat and 1 UAP.

Queensland; Probably a Nat winning 5th and UAP winning 6th. Sadly I don’t see a Green winning in this state of environmental vandals. 2 Lib, 2 Lab, 1 Nat and 1 UAP

So in the 5th and 6th seats, I’m tipping 3 Greens (total 7), 4 Lib (total 31) 1 ALP (total 28) UAP 2 (total 2) Nats 2 (total 4) PHON 0 (total 1) CA 0 (total 2) AC 0 (total 1)

This comes down to Right 41, Left (Lab+Greens) 35

I need to be wrong in FOUR states for the IPA/Liberal/OddBalls Coalition to lose power in the Senate. I can see me being wrong once or twice. Possibly even three times. But four? Sorry. Bill will have a grumpy Senate to deal with.

Gough Whitlam failed at that task, I fear Bill may do so as well.

Which Generation Is Which? (1883 to 2012)


I have suffered from some confusion about which Generation appeared in which year. In my social media platforms I have noticed a lot of other people have the same confusions. In fact a number of people are quite antagonistic to some groups of innocents who had no choice in the year of their birth.

I did some research on a number of websites and found that although there are minor differences, there is a general agreement on the eras of each cohort. (See, I read the articles and learned a new jargon word.)

So here is a general article, gleaned from a cohort of population experts. The comments are general and do not refer to individuals but to a tendency. There are always exceptions to any of these rules.

The Lost Generation – 1883 – 1900 – Gertrude Stein “You are all a lost generation.” The generation that came of age during World War I, which took the lives of 40 million people. “Lost” in this context also means “disoriented, wandering, directionless” – a recognition that there was great confusion and aimlessness among the war’s survivors in the early post-war years. In Great Britain, the term was originally used for those who died in the war, and often implicitly referred to upper-class casualties who were perceived to have died disproportionately, robbing the country of a future elite.

The Greatest Generation, 1900 -1925 –  The generation shaped by the Great Depression and the primary participants in World War II. Depression era individuals tend to be conservative, compulsive savers, maintain low debt, tend to feel a responsibility to leave a legacy to their children and display patriotism, are oriented toward work before pleasure, respect
for authority and have a sense of moral obligation.

The Silent Generation – 1925 – 1945 – The demographic cohort following the Greatest Generation. Australia’s McCrindle Research uses the name Builders to describe the Australian members of this generation, born between 1925 and 1945, and coming of age to become the generation “who literally and metaphorically built the nation after the austerity years post-Depression and World War II”. This generation had significant opportunities in jobs and education as the War ended and a post-war economic boom struck America. However, the growth in Cold War tensions, the potential for nuclear war and other never before seen threats led to levels of discomfort and uncertainty throughout the generation. Members of this group value security, comfort, and familiar, known activities and environments.

Baby Boomers 1946 – 1954 – For a long time the Baby Boomers were defined as those born between 1945 and 1964 encompassing people who were 20 years apart in age. It didn’t compute to have those born in 1964 compared with those born in 1946. Life experiences were completely different. Attitudes, behaviors and society were vastly different. In effect, all the elements that help to define a cohort were violated by the broad span of years originally included in the concept of the Baby Boomers. The first Boomer segment is bounded by the Kennedy and Martin Luther King assassinations, the Civil Rights movements and the Vietnam War. Boomers I were in or protested the War.

Boomers 1955 – 1965 – This first post-Watergate generation lost much of its trust in government and optimistic views the Boomers I maintained. Economic struggles including the oil embargo of 1979 reinforced a sense of “I’m out for me” and narcissism and a focus on self-help and skepticism over media and institutions is representative of attitudes of this cohort. While Boomers I had Vietnam, Boomers II had AIDS as part of their rites of passage.

Generation X – 1966-1976 – Sometimes referred to as the “lost” generation, this was the first generation of “latchkey” kids, exposed to lots of daycare and divorce. Known as the generation with the lowest voting participation rate of any generation, Gen Xers were quoted by Newsweek as “the generation that dropped out without ever turning on the news or tuning in to the social issues around them.”

Generation Y,  1977-1994 – (Echo Boomers or Millenniums) Gen Y kids are known as incredibly sophisticated, technology wise, immune to most traditional marketing and sales pitches…as they not only grew up with it all, they’ve seen it all and been exposed to it all since early childhood. Gen Y members are much more racially and ethnically diverse and they are much more segmented as an audience aided by the rapid expansion in Cable TV channels, satellite radio, the Internet, e-zines, etc.

Generation Z – 1995 – 2012 – While we don’t know much about Gen Z yet…we know a lot about the environment they are growing up in. This highly diverse environment will make the grade schools of the next generation the most diverse ever. Higher levels of technology will make significant inroads in academics allowing for customized instruction, data mining of student histories to enable pinpoint diagnostics and remediation or accelerated achievement opportunities.

Having sorted all that out and without giving anything away, I shall keep my silence.

Some Early Morning Chicken Sounds


I scawled this back in 2006. I think it is worthy of a re-run.

EARLY MORNING CHICKEN SOUNDS

The early morning chicken sounds
Mix gently with my coffee grounds
So ears and tastebuds waken while
My face breaks open with a smile

I have survived another night
And now can glory in the sight
Of growing trees and flowing stream
Now knowing life is not a dream.

One day I know I will not wake
Yet from this life I know I’ll take
The early morning chicken sounds
Mixed gently with some coffee grounds.

Image

The Durian News


The Great Darling River Water Heist Part the Second


Waiting for Ronnie Salt to be de-listed by twitter – again.

Thread stored here for safekeeping.

**************************************************************

New conversation
💧Ronni Salt‏ @MsVeruca 20m20 minutes ago

Another day at the farm and another small tale to tell. And this time it’s about Angus Taylor, his other Cayman’s connections, his involvement in water buyback issues – and his extreme dislike of anybody discussing these. #watergate #auspol
1 reply 23 retweets 29 likes

Remember Eastern Australia Irrigation? The one in the Caymans where a large chunk of your $80 million went? On the same day that company was registered in the Caymans – another company was registered. In fact the 2 company’s registration numbers are 1 digit apart.

salt2

So who registered that company at the same time as Eastern Australia Irrigation? We do know the name of the company was Agricultural Managers Limited – and it would go on to attempt great things.

But before its ambitious tilt at Australia’s largest irrigation property, AML sat there quietly in the Caymans doing not much at all. Until one day in 2009, when the water buybacks market in Australia really started to fire up. (Remember the $300 million Twynham deal?)

In light of this, the offshore Cayman’s AML decided to act It set up 2 companies in Australia – 1 called Agricultural Managers Australia Ltd (AMA) & another called Australia Agricultural Securitisation Ltd (AASL)* (*At least they could never stand accused of creativity)

Both Agricultural Managers Australia Ltd (AMA) & Australia Agricultural Securitisation Ltd (AASL) were registered in Nov & Dec 2009 by the sole director & secretary – Angus Taylor.

So – AML was the parent company in the Caymans, which owned AMA, which then owned AASL. Got it? Both AMA & AASL were registered with 2 x $1 shareholdings. A good investment it seems.
Millions of $ were flying around, and it appears that was the purpose of establishing these companies – to trade in the commodification of water Because in 2010, the Cayman’s AML popped up in the media for the first time They were making a bold bid to buy Cubbie Station.

In 2010 media reports, a spokesperson for the company bidding to buy Cubbie for $240 million was a Mr Angus Taylor, who self-identified as a director of Agricultural Managers Ltd, the Caymans company. Note they also managed Kia Ora & Clyde, the future water buyback properties

Angus Taylor’s bid to buy Cubbie is also confirmed by a conversation Angus Taylor once had with Simon Holmes a Court. In it, Angus Taylor told Holmes a Court that he, Taylor, had tried three times to buy Cubbie Station. And there’s nothing wrong with that.

By the way, Angus Taylor & his fellow directors were helped along in the Cubbie Station deals by a consultancy & lobbying firm called Fifth Estate.

But before they had signed any contracts for title, the first thing the prospective bidders AML did was to attempt to sell 92,000 megalitres of water back to the federal government. Before they had even bought the property. #watergate #MurrayDarling

 

Now Cubbie Station in Queensland’s Lower Balonne has the capacity to extract, harvest & store over 500,000 megalitres of water. Even at the bargain basement price of $1000 per megalitre, that’s a lot of helpful finance from a federal gov’t with $ billions to spend on water.

In addition, there is no mention of Agricultural Managers Ltd or its subsidiaries in any of the annual reporting that EAA lodges with ASIC, even though the media said it was running the EAA properties. Why no disclosure in any of the annual reports to ASIC?

Now fast forward, to 2017 when Barnaby & the dept do the $80M deal with EAA – a very interesting thing happens. Information released shows that both EAA and AML engaged a lobbyist firm in 2017. And we know what you’re thinking. Yes, it’s our old friends the Fifth Estate.

From 2012 onward, AML has no apparent business interests in Australia. And yet it engages a professional lobbying firm for an undisclosed fee in the same time period as EAA.

In another remarkable coincidence – Tandou the other lucky $80M water Barnaby buyback deal recipients – also engage the Fifth Estate to act for them in 2017.

The entire issue does raise a lot of questions, questions that should be asked it not for one small but very significant detail – Mr Angus Taylor and his wife are very quick to threaten legal action.

We’ve already seen the Wikipedia discussions where Angus Taylor’s wife threatens legal action for minor infringements on his wiki page. What is less known are Mr & Mrs Taylor’s threats to anybody who mentions EAA and the Caymans.

In 2014 a small Goulburn based Facebook page was threatened with legal action by Mrs Taylor for the sin of posting a newspaper article referring to Angus Taylor’s Caymans connections. In turn, the newspaper the Goulburn Post were also threatened & had to issue an apology.


Aoife Champion, ALP candidate for Hume once mentioned the taboo subject of Angus Taylor, EAA & the Caymans back in 2016. The next day a staffer rang her & demanded amateur video of the event be edited to remove any mention of the taboo subjects. An amateur community video.

This may seem reductive stuff to those more focused on carrot picking & sheep shearing, but it goes toward a pattern of silencing members of the public by threats or intimidation. And that behavior continues.

We have legal threats issued to journalists on twitter, Wikipedia, people on Facebook, The Australian newspaper, the Goulburn Post & even community members filming video. And every time it is the off-limits subject – Angus Taylor, the Cayman Islands & his association with EAA.

It is not defamatory to question a cabinet minister in relation to information properly the subject of public scrutiny. We are not alleging any wrong doing. Like many members of the media – we ordinary Australians have questions.

 

We would be happy for anybody to answer these questions: #watergate

salt13

And just to finish Mr Taylor, here are Michael West’s questions from April 21 which remain unanswered to this day: #auspol

Because twitter does not allow an addendum: Simon Holmes a Court’s conversation

This thread was compiled with research from the magnificent @jommy_tee – who I forgot to add at the beginning of the thread. He is the king.

Nobody Expects


 

Coalition Vandalism


There is no quick fix to six years of vandalism by this government.

Vandalism to the NDIS,
Vandalism to Social Security
Vandalism to the NBN
Vandalism to Asylum Seekers
Vandalism to Wages
Vandalism to the Environment
Vandalism to slowing Climate Change
Vandalism to the Tax System
Vandalism to the National debt
Vandalism to our Freedom
Vandalism to our rivers
Vandalism to the Democracy of Australia
Vandalism to the Unions
Vandalism to our Privacy
Vandalism to our Health System
Vandalism to our Public assets
Vandalism to Education
Vandalism to our Hospitals
Vandalism to our Power System
Vandalism to our ABC & SBS
Vandalism to our Homeless
Vandalism to our water supplies through Fracking

With the best will in the world, no alternative Government is going to be able to fix all of this vandalism in a single term of Government. It will take at least three terms.

By 2030, providing we have been able to remove the Murdoch influence, we may be, again, the nation of mateship and the fair go!