Monday, September 13, 2004

Politicians as graffiti artists

Politicians will be allowed to display election posters on telegraph poles for seven days if a Lord Mayoral Minute is passed at tonight's Council Meeting. The minute affects Council's Graffiti policy. Greens councillor Chris Harris is believed to have a motion calling for the posters to remain until the election on October 9.

Lord Mayor Clover Moore has called in Parliament for election posters to be permitted 28 days before an election, to removed within 14 days after an election, describing the process as a traditional part of Australian democracy. The Labor government has refused such a move. It is noted that Labor Party corflutes are all over the city at the moment.


Anonymous said...

Well what would you expect from these low life individuals.

This little snippet by Malcolm Farr in the Telegraph last week says it all.

“There are areas where the Greens might do well on the environmental interest and the battle is heating up in the electorate of Sydney held by Labor's Tanya Plibersek.

Ms Plibersek last week said she was concerned by a constituent's claim he had watched council workers pull down one of her campaign signs on Crown St but leave a Greens poster hanging on the opposite corner.

Greens candidate in Sydney Jenny Leong told my colleague Michelle Cazzulino she also had some of her signs removed. "Some of them have been removed since we put them up . . . my understanding is that's a bit of a grey area between federal and local governments," she said.

That sort of grey area can lead to claims of dirty tricks in an intense election contest such as that between Labor and the Greens”

And don't think that these low lifers will obey the law. Its illegal to attatch anything to an electricity pole. That is an act of parliament. Clover knows this.

Anonymous said...


What would that two faced Clover know about democracy. She has supported some of the most undemocratic Acts of Parliament to fulfil her own ends.


The Editor said...

Well, from my observation of the endless hard work Clover puts in at people-level (as a journalist I have been to the street meetings etc), she is the most democratic politician I have ever seen.

Regarding signage, neither the Feds or the power companies police signage -- it's up to Council -- and they are simply changing the frequency of removal. This will save us ratepayers money, allow the minor parties such as the Greens and independents to compete with the big boys, and allow you to advertise your lost cat, or a room for rent, or a garage sale.

Sounds pretty democratic to me.

Anonymous said...

Clover Moore democratic? No way. Ask Greg Kables. Possibly one of the most undemocratic acts in the history of the NSW Parliament.

Anonymous said...

I agree she is not a believer in democracy. Clover supported legislation which prevented any business suing the injecting centre if they collapsed under the burden of junkies ruling the strip. Don't know what her problem is other than she hates business ( providing you don't operate an injecting centre)

Anonymous said...

Found this summary of Moore on the web.........................................

Clover Moore (IND)
Member for Bligh in NSW

Independant and gutless unless you are a dead beat bleeding heart, dope smoking dole bludging housing commission resident, Clover (Can't answer letters that contain words with more than 3 letters) Moore local Independant Member for Bligh in NSW has as much guts as inanimate road kill.

On issues that are actually relevant to the wider community, Clover
has taken her lessons from the Mayor of SOUTHPARK. Cleverly enshrining herself in a majority area and dedicated to the nobel causes of saving brain dead aboriginal disabled whales that strand themselves in Surry Hills, she has not an ounce of compassion for the poor schmucks who actually pay their taxes. Clover Moore is Less than ballsy when it comes to dealing with issues that are raised by those who vote in her community that actually pay tax, when you find a good majority of voters, stick to them and hang the consequences for the elctorate, there's more votes from pinko lesbian sole parents ripping off the sytem than there is from the poor dills that earn the money to support the system.

The Editor said...

City of Sydney in fact has the highest demographic in the state in terms of numbers employed, qualification levels and mean income. The landslide majority Clover won by did not come from the marginalised people so horribly described in that bigoted and inaccurate diatribe.

Re the Injecting Centre -- indeed it seems unfair that the surrounding businesses have to cop the flak for everyone else's social responsibility. Two empty shops and a struggling but friendly photo business tell the story. Small business should be recognised as a disadvantaged group -- I read about parking meters in Randwick -- why pay a meter and patronise a small business when you can park for free at Westfield? The big money gets the money -- oh, and the council of course.

Anonymous said...

Two empty shops?

There are 17 in Daringhurst Rd
There are 9 in Roslyn St Rd
There are 5 im Bayswater Rd
There are 3 in the Millenium Building.

I will do a count in Victoria St and McLeay St

And amazingly the closed shops were non tourist They were local businesses supplying goods and services for residents.

Dosen't this say it all?

The Editor said...

Who is Greg Kable?

Anonymous said...

Kable a murderer was recommended by the parole board to be released at the end of his sentence. Clover Moore supported an act of parliament that he should never be released. Kable appealed to the High Court and won.

Honourable members may recall that it was the former Coalition Premier John Fahey who began the sentencing auction almost 10 years ago when he tried unsuccessfully to keep Gregory Kable in gaol with the Community Protection Act 1994. Before the legislation was passed former Premier Fahey lamented judicial recommendations that certain prisoners should never be released. He wanted the recommendations to be taken literally by the Parole Board, even though some of the prisoners demonstrated that they were no longer a threat to the community. Former Premier Fahey wanted these prisoners to stay in gaol regardless of their rehabilitation. On 16 May 1993 he told the Sun-Herald:

We cannot go back to … put in a new sentence and we've no intention of doing it. But we are prepared to look at those who were recommended never to be released, even though there was no legal power or legal basis for that statement.

This was a defining moment in the history of sentencing in New South Wales because the Carr Labor Government subsequently picked up Mr Fahey's misconceived idea that a judge's remarks on sentencing could be turned into legislation. The expression "never to be released", which was nothing more than an expression of opinion by the sentencing judge, has now been set in concrete, so to speak, by Mr Carr's Crimes Legislation

Anonymous said...

The Hon. ELISABETH KIRKBY: My question without notice is addressed to the Attorney General, and Minister for Industrial Relations. In view of the fact that Justice Grove of the New South Wales Supreme Court has refused his application for the further detention of Gregory Wayne Kable under the Community Protection Act, will the Government now consider repealing this legislation as a matter of priority? If not, why not?

The Hon. J. W. SHAW: The question raises the issue of general legal policy concern. On 21 August this year the Supreme Court, constituted by Justice Grove, ordered the release of Mr Kable. I made it clear publicly that I was concerned about aspects of that decision. However, the decision as to any appeal was vested in the Director of Public Prosecutions, and he determined that there was no reasonable prospect of an appeal against the judgment of Justice Grove succeeding. Courts generally have expressed a variety of concerns about the Community Protection Act, which led to the incarceration of Mr Kable. The constitutional validity of the Community Protection Act is being challenged in the High Court of Australia. Recently the High Court granted Mr Kable special leave to appeal to attack the validity of that legislation. That grant of special leave was opposed by the Solicitor General for the Crown but was nonetheless granted by the court.

It is expected that that constitutional challenge will be heard by the High Court early next year. Interesting and profound questions are raised as to the relationship between a sovereign Parliament and the judicial system - questions about the separation of powers and whether that document is applicable to State constitutions and the like. Honourable members will no doubt be further enlightened by the High Court's pronouncements on those difficult and important issues. The legislation as determined by the Parliament only applies to Mr Kable, so there seems to be no pressing practical reason to repeal it. I will consider any representations made, but I have no proposal to put to the Cabinet or the Government which would effectively repeal the legislation.

The Editor said...

I still don't fully get the Clover connection.

I have been told Mr Kable made threats while in gaol to kill the family of his victim -- had this been superseded by subsequent rehabilitation? I assume so or he wouldn't have been paroled -- if indeed he was??

And I don't agree with retrospective legislation, either.