Put Labor Last

Branch stacking? We love it. We're Labor (60)

2006-09-26T06:30:00.000+10:00

This week I want to explore my favourite topic, branch stacking. This time I don't want to explore the fact that it is going on. We all know that it is going on, in serious proportions. That's a given. This week I want to explore the things we don't know about it. I want to try to extrapolate from the things we do know (ie. that it is going on in serious proportions) to try and uncover some of the unknowns.

It seems that many people have spent a lot of time and energy trying to gather evidence to prove that it is going on. A lot of good, dedicated Labor people have spent a lot of their time trying to catch the branch stackers out. Their focus has been on exposing it. Many are still hopeful that if they expose it to the upper echelons of the ALP hierarchy in Victoria, the leadership will be shocked into action and will then do everything in its power to solve the problem. After all, the ALP’s rules prohibit branch stacking.

But I want to start from a fairly safe assumption, and that is that the upper echelons of the ALP hierarchy in Victoria know that it is going on and choose to do nothing about it. You can read some of my previous posts and make your own mind up about whether this is a safe assumption. Branch stacking appears to be rife in the safe Labor electorates and it is particularly bad in the Western Suburbs of Melbourne. There is no question that this practice is going on and that the ALP in Victoria allows it to go on.

The average punter doesn't know what branch stacking is and, therefore, doesn't comprehend the serious impact it can have on a community. In effect, the practice allows corrupt individuals to buy their way into parliament. But these corrupt individuals couldn't buy their way into parliament unless the organisation (in this case the ALP) itself was corrupt, because there are rules in place to prevent the practice. In the face of strong evidence that the practice is rife, the rules must be deliberately disregarded by the organisation for an individual to get into parliament on the back of a branch stacking racket.

So why is it happening? How does a relatively unknown Labor shonk come out of nowhere to run a branch stacking racket—which ultimately becomes a key factor in the subsequent election of the shonk to parliament—and get away with it?

There are a number of possible reasons for why these shonks are getting away with their branch stacking rackets. I have already disregarded the first possible reason, which is that those people who have the responsibility for managing the party and upholding its rules, don't know that it is going on. We know that those in power do know it is going on. Their own reports has told them that it is going on. So if they know it is going on (which they do), there has got to be a reason for why they allow it to continue. One possible reason for this is that they don't think it is that serious.

I know some people within the ALP think this way. But of course Labor's own rules indicate that branch stacking is serious and prescribes quite serious penalties for it (including expulsion, suspension, etc).

Branch stacking is serious and that's why the penalties are serious. Taken to its extreme, branch stacking would allow anyone who has the money to buy their way into pre-selection. Sure, pre-selection isn't just based on member votes. The ALP's Executive Committee also have a big say in who gets pre-selected (I believe their input accounts for ½ of the final outcome). But if you have stacked the numbers really well, you may only need a small amount of support from the Executive Committee to get up.

So if you happen to be a rich shonk, you can pay for people’s ALP membership and pay them to vote for you.

Taken to the extreme (as it has been taken in some electorates), pre-selection no longer has any basis in democracy. The process becomes a joke. And what about those stackers that do it really, really well, the ones that are so good at it (or just willing to put so much money into it) that they can buy off or introduce large numbers of "Labor members” into several electorates. They wield so much power that they can become the ALP’s factional leaders.

Branch stacking is serious and Labor’s leadership group knows it’s serious. So we can disregard this as a reason for why it is going on. Tomorrow we’ll explore another reason for why Labor allows branch stacking to go on.

Labor sells Telmo a seat in Parliament (61)

2006-09-25T06:30:00.000+10:00

It's old news now, but it's still interesting and relevant today. In 1998, Channel 9's Sunday program ran a story called Labor Seats for Sale. That's where yesterday's quote comes from. The story covers Labor's branch stacking antics in general, but a fair portion of it relates to Victoria, and the Western Suburbs of Melbourne in particular.

I am only vaguely familiar with the story and the fallout that followed it, so I would be interested in any insights people have on this.

The transcript to this story is very interesting with regard to what it says about Telmo Languiller. He's been stacking branches since 1998. Labor has known about it and has done nothing about it.

This is what the Sunday reporter had to say about Telmo at the time:

...Telmo Languiller is an unknown imposed on the electorate by the right wing of the party. Languiller featured in an earlier report on Sunday in which he was accused of branch stacking. Disturbing questions were also raised about the conduct of the pre-selection ballot in which he won endorsement.

At the pre-selection people were intimidated, they had cards ripped out of their hands and were told how to vote.

Pre-selection for the seats that take in the Western Suburbs of Melbourne was a joke back then and it's still a joke today. John Cain's report from 2004 also implicated Telmo Languiller in serious branch stacking activities.

This is just further evidence that Labor has a love affair with the branch stackers and that Labor's branch stacking rules aren't worth the paper they are written on. The branch stacking operations that occur in the west are blatant and rampant.

No-one should make the mistake of thinking that this is something that Labor doesn't know about. The ALP in Victoria fully understand that this is going on and allows it to continue. Effectively, by allowing people like Telmo to run a branch stacking operation in the Western Suburbs - as Labor has done for Telmo since 1998 - they are selling Telmo a seat in parliament.

So what's the trade off? What did the ALP get for the sale? Has Telmo guaranteed a few other MPs the numbers in their elecorates as well? They must have got something.

What Labor thinks of the Western Suburbs of Melbourne (62)

2006-09-24T22:30:00.000+10:00

This is what a former Labor Minister said back in 1998:

"The Western Suburbs of Melbourne has been used as a dumping ground (by Labor) for a number of thugs. Little better than that, a number of thugs who make no impression on the Parliament."

Ian Baker, former Treasurer of Victoria (1998, on the Sunday program)

It's no different today of course. Labor treats its heartland in the Western Suburbs of Melbourne with complete contempt.

Labor's branch stacking shonks (63)

2006-09-23T19:34:00.000+10:00

The following quote from the ABC's (March 6) World Today radio broadcast relates to a story on branch stacking in Victoria. But the quote comes from former NSW Labor Minister, Rodney Cavalier:

"I think Rodney Cavalier in New South Wales has a wonderful test. He says that when you see people coming into a Labor Party preselection room, you must ask them two questions - where are you and what are you doing?"

You can read the entire trancript here: Labor shonks. It's just a further insight into where Labor is at in Victoria.

You really have to laugh at Rodney Cavalier's suggestion. Labor has allowed the party to sink so low that a lot of people turning up to vote in the pre-selections don't even know what they are doing there. The anwer you'd get from a lot of them is "I just have to tick this box because the guy on the bus (of course they've been bused in, otherwise they wouldn't be there) told me to, then he's taking us all for a nice lunch." They're there either because they've been paid to be there or because they've been coerced by Labor's so called "community leaders". We'd call them Labor shonks, but I guess that's just a difference of opinion we have with Labor.

Resist until the death: Labor's approach to corruption (64)

2006-09-22T06:30:00.000+10:00

Labor continues to resist calls for an independent Crime and Misconduct Commission. They have one in New South Wales and they have one in Queensland. Why oh why can't we have one in Victoria?

The Age ran a great article on the need for a Commission of this type a few years back (How we must fight organised crime), which is still relevant today.

Victoria did set up the Office of Public Integrity, which investigates allegations of corruption in the police force, but this doesn't go far enough and has been criticised for being under-resourced.

In Queensland and NSW, these commissions have had a major impact on reducing corruption, not just within the police forces in the respective states, but in reducing corruption in all of the the public sector institutions that come under their jurisdiction.

I guess the difference in Victoria is that in both Queensland and NSW these commissions were set up following recommendations that resulted from far reaching inquiries into corruption in each State.

Victoria needs a similar inquiry. In many respects Victoria today is reminiscent of pre-Fitzgerald Queensland, and that is saying something. The Fitzgerald Inquiry in Queensland was a watershed for the State, so much so that people today regularly refer to life in Queensland pre and post Fitzgerald.

Why is it that Labor continues to resist calls for an independent commission of this type? What are they scared of?

Police out of control under Bracks (65)

2006-09-21T06:24:00.000+10:00

Yesterday's report on police corruption, which appeared on the front page of the Age, was no surprise to many who live in the West. With the previous Police Minister Andre Haermeyer leading the way, is it any wonder that the police force is in the state it is in?

We can only hope that the Age continues to expose these corrupt practices. Maybe if enough pressure is applied to the Bracks government, something will finally be done about the illegal gambling houses in Sunhsine. God knows the local police have been asked to do something about these places for many years, but for some reason they seem to be above the law.

I know a lot of people think it's all a bit of harmless card playing for money, which is true enough. But it's still against the law. The bigger concern is the additional illegal activity that occurs within and around these venues in Hampshire Road. These venues appear to be the hub of various illegal activities, including drug deals that occur on a daily basis, often in broad daylight.

Various thieves also take their stolen goods up to these illegal gambling venues to sell to the patrons (and owners). Again this is done quite blatantly, and shop assistants in the area are often accosted by these theives and asked if they would like to purchase various stolen items.

We know that the complaints to the local police about this (by the local shop keepers) have been next to useless. The illegal trade continues, often blatantly, day and night.

So the past experience of many in the West shows that going through the proper channels is unlikely to get you anywhere with the Bracks government. We can only hope that the media pressure continues and the government is shamed into doing something about the corruption.

Labor's numbskulls in Brimbank (66)

2006-09-20T06:00:00.000+10:00

Labor’s councillors in Brimbank have gone and embarrassed the ALP again. It's becoming a habit with this dysfunctional mob, a habit that just can't be broken because they have the full backing of a dysfunctional Minister for Local Government, Candy Broad. These imbeciles on Council also have very strong connections to Labor’s Federal MP, Brendan O’Connor, and Labor’s do-nothing State MPs, Telmo Languiller, George Seitz, and Andre Haermeyer.

Make no mistake, Labor’s MPs and these councillors have a symbiotic relationship; they’re inseparable. These councillors are a true reflection of the state of the Labor Party in Victoria, and the reflection is not a pretty one.

As you may have read in one of my previous posts, Brimbank’s councillors failed to support a motion, moved by a Greens councillor, condemning Howard’s industrial relations (WorkChoices) legislation.

It is a bizarre turn of events, to have Labor councillors in Brimbank, fully endorsed and supported by Labor MPs, refusing to condemn Howard’s IR laws. It’s been so embarrassing for Labor that Brendan O’Connor has had to write to the Council offering to “educate” these numbskulls on the ramifications of Howard’s IR laws.

The whole lot of them should have been sacked a long time ago, we all know that. What we have with these councillors is a bunch of carcasses swinging in the breeze, but Candy Broad refuses to step in and cut them down.

They really are an embarrassment and, with such strong connections to Labor MPs, a sad reflection of the state of the ALP in Victoria. The effect they are having on Beazley is comical. Beazley is pinning all his hopes of re-election—and it is his only hope—on Howard’s atrocious IR Laws; it’s all he has going for himself and the Labor Party at the Federal level. It is his golden opportunity to become Prime Minister, not because of great leadership ability, but because Howard has ballsed this up big time. It’s his only hope and he needs everyone in the Labor Party, at every level, to be united on this issue, otherwise it could all start unravelling.

Without the IR laws and a united Labor Party at all levels, Labor at the Federal level will be mince meat at the next election, as it has been for several previous elections.

O’Connor’s offer to “educate” the Councillors is code for “pull your heads in you idiots. Just because you’re all nongs, don’t taint us with your idiocy (we've already been tainted enough by our own)”. It wouldn’t surprise me if O’Connor’s so called "education" program was a directive from Beazley himself.

To top it off, the unions have now written to the Brimbank Council, demanding that they condemn the WorkChoices legislation. The Australian Services Union are terrified of this rabid mob of councillors, led by Mayor Natalie Suleyman. They’re terrified that this loose cannon will have all the Council’s employees on Australian Workplace Agreements if given half a chance.

They’ve got to cut these carcasses down, for Christ’s sake.

Western suburbs neglect (67)

2006-09-19T06:36:00.000+10:00

The main reason to put Labor last on your ballot slip at the coming election is Labor’s blatant neglect in the safe Labor electorates. The people who live in these electorates are used, abused and taken for granted by Labor.

Nowhere is this more obvious than in the western suburbs of Melbourne.

Of course, all safe seats experience some neglect. It goes with the territory. But Labor has taken neglect to new heights in the western suburbs of Melbourne. Labor has been dreadfully neglectful in the following areas:

Public transport – with the Sydenham line regarded as the most over-crowded line in all of Melbourne. Is it not strange that the worst service in Melbourne, winds its way through some of Labor’s safest seats in Victoria? To top things off, at a public meeting, Peter Batchelor (the Transport Minister) didn’t even know where the Melton line was. He got it mixed up with the Sydenham line!
Gambling revenue - the Labor government takes enormous amounts of pokie revenue out of the western suburbs, in the form of taxes, but gives nothing back. Where is the money going? We see no noticeable improvements in the west as a result of all this additional revenue that the Labor government is taking out of these suburbs.
Recreation facilities - these are a disgrace in the western suburbs. Many sporting facilities have deteriorated dreadfully, and in many cases resemble third world facilities.

The really surprising part is that the majority of people in these suburbs continue to vote Labor. However, if the recent council election results in Maribyrnong and Brimbank are anything to go by, maybe people are finally realising that Labor only rapes and pillages in the safe seats. Maribyrnong elected a number of Greens and independent councillors, so that for the first time ever, Labor does not have a majority. And Brimbank now has a Greens councillor for the first time ever. So maybe people are finally waking up to what Labor is really about today.

We can only hope.

Broken promises (68)

2006-09-18T06:54:00.000+10:00

Bracks sure has broken a lot of promises. Check out this website for 288 reasons why you should put Labor last at the coming election: www.bracksbrokenpromises.com.au

John Lenders and the Cairnlea Park debacle (69)

2006-09-17T18:48:00.000+10:00

It’s obvious that Candy Broad has a lot answer for. She’s clearly biased in carrying out her duties as the Minister for Local Government. She’s quick to intervene in the affairs of Liberal dominated councils, as she did with the Glen Eira Council last year, but for Labor dominated Councils it’s a free for all.

She allowed Mayor Natalie Suleyman to get away with the deal of 10 lifetimes, for the benefit of a soccer club with strong connections to the Mayor’s family. Everything about this deal is wrong. The Cairnlea community don’t want it. And of course, no other sporting club had the opportunity to be considered for the Suleyman special funding arrangement. It was a special funding arrangement available only to the Allbion soccer club.

Other sporting clubs in the same municipality have to put up with abysmal sporting facilities and are now wondering if they should pay Natalie’s father or brother to join their committees. That seems to be the answer to getting funding in Brimbank. If you can't beat them you've got to join them, or get them to join your club!

But as hopeless as Candy Broad is, she’s not the only one that has a lot to answer for in this debacle. John Lenders is the other Labor Minister who was also a key player in the Cairnlea debacle. John Lenders’ portfolio includes Vic Urban and Vic Urban promised prospective (now actual) residents of Cairnlea a multi-use sporting facility at Cairnlea Park.

John Lenders is responsible for this broken promise to the Cairnlea residents. And why did he break his promise to the Cairnlea community? Was he doing a favour for Brimbank’s Mayor?

Labor sticks it up the Cairnlea community (70)

2006-09-16T06:28:00.000+10:00

Following on from yesterday's post; the dust settled after this issue blew up in the media and was raised in Parliament. Candy Broad, the Minister for Local Government, dug her heels in and refused to act. If the saying "actions speak louder than words" is true, then according to Candy, Suleyman can do what she likes.

There was a flurry of activity, an outraged community appealed to the Labor government to do something about the blatant rorting, but nothing was done. The government and the Brimbank Council kept bleeting on about the Juniors being a totally separate club to the Rovers, which, to any thinking person, was preposterous. The application to Council for the Juniors' relocation was on Rovers' letter-head. Just weeks prior to this issue blowing up, Mehmet Suleyman was listed as a contact for the juniors and seniors of the one club. They even listed his phone number (ie. if you have any queries regarding the Rovers or Juniors, phone Mehmet - who was on the committee of management of the one club)!

"Totally separate clubs", they insisted.

Of course, eventually the dust did settle and everything went quiet on this issue. The Cairnlea residents, who had fought a tireless battle, were spent. That's when Natalie struck a final cruel blow to the Cairnlea community. At a Council meeting in May this year, the councillors - led by Natalie - voted to move the Albion Rovers to Cairnlea park, to join the Juniors. And those who had fought for so long for something to be done about this issue could only observe this peculiar development with despair; the travesty of the situation: for in this decision to relocate the Rovers, hadn't the Council just acknowledged what they, and the the Labor Government, had adamantly denied for months? This was just further proof that the Albion Juniors and Rovers were clearly one and the same club, not totally separate entities as they had insisted.

The fact that the Rovers still have outstanding debts of $14,000 (which Melton Council has given up on trying to recover), did not even register as an issue when this decision was made. By this stage the community had understood loud and clear that the Labor government was going to let Natalie do what she wanted, regardless of how shonky it all was. So you didn't hear a peep out of the community when this final decision to relocate the Rovers was made; they had been beaten into submission. Just the way Labor likes it.

Natalie has won. The Cairnlea community lies defeated, just another Labor casualty. And of course, the Labor government has given Natalie the right to gloat about how she stuck it up the Cairnlea community for years.

To those connected with her family, Natalie has delivered the deal of a life time. Council and Government will tip in almost $1 Million dollars, to a disreputable club with strong connections to Natalie's family, to develop club rooms and soccer fields for the exclusive use of a club that has no connection whatsoever to the Cairnlea community.

The soccer rort develops nicely (71)

2006-09-15T06:24:00.000+10:00

So, following on from yesterday's post, Brimbank's Mayor, Natalie Suleyman votes to move the soccer club without declaring a conflict of interest. Then a reporter sticks his nose in and all of a sudden everything starts blowing up in Natalie's face.

Mehmet Suleyman’s name disappears off the soccer club's committee of management register, within day’s of this story breaking in the media. Natalie is adamant that the Rovers and Juniors are totally separate clubs, despite the soccer club's president contradicting her in the local media. It really was a farce and Natalie's insistence that the club's were separate was an insult onany thinking person's intelligence.

It was clear that the Albion Rovers Soccer Club and the Albion Juniors Soccer Club were one and the same organisation. Everybody knew it and everybody still knows it. Only Candy Broad didn't want to believe the overwheming evidence.

A number of residents wrote to Candy Broad, requesting that something be done about this. After all, the Cairnlea community didn’t want the club. They were promised a multi-use facility, not a facility provided for the exclusive use of a soccer club that the community had no relationship with. It was a bizarre decision by the Brimbank Council and it was also a broken promise by Vic Urban.

Of course, Cairnlea residents were furious about this decision. How could the Mayor get away with this? "We’ll write to Candy Broad", they thought, and "surely she will correct this injustice".

So Candy Broad received a number of letters from concerned residents, who were hopeful that the Minister would intervene. After all, the rort was as obvious as the nose on Candy’s face. But she did nothing, absolutely nothing.

Candy Broad is an absolute disgrace. There was overwhelming evidence that this was a rort, plain and simple. But she chose to turn a blind eye to it.

So in their desperation, the community turned to the opposition – remember many of these community members have been long term Labor voters. They were shocked by Candy Broad’s inaction. Many began to speculate that maybe Candy was in on the scam. Or because Candy was part of Labor Unity, maybe the whole of Labor Unity was rotten. All the signs were there. What else could people conclude? It was such an obvious rort by Natalie Suleyman, for the benefit of a soccer club with a strong association with her family. How could Candy, the Minister for Local Government, do nothing???

So the community turned to John Vogels, the Shadow Minister for Local Government and to his credit, Vogels took up the cause and raised the matter in parliament, on two occasions. In fact, he was so disgusted by Suleyman’s blatant rort, that on one occasion he spoke for almost 20 minutes on this matter in parliament. No doubt, the Brimbank community are very appreciative of his efforts to help sort out this sordid mess. Increasingly, traditional Labor voters are giving up on Labor as they come to understand what this Party has become.

But Candy just dug her heels in, insisting that the Albion Juniors and Albion Seniors were separate clubs, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

It became quite a hysterical situation for those in the know, because they knew the “Juniors” was just a front for the Albion Rovers. Because the Rovers had such a disgraceful history and such a strong connection to the Suleymans, the club had to use trickery to build some distance between the Rovers and the Juniors in people’s minds. But the intention always was for the Juniors to get the approval (including funding by Council and Vic Urban) and then for the Rovers to follow, after all they are one and the same club.

Here’s the hysterical part. As this blew up in parliament and in the local media, Suleyman had to strongly insist over and over that the two clubs were separate. Meanwhile the Rovers were becoming furious with the Suleymans – their deal with the Suleymans was for both the Rovers and the Juniors to move, but now that it was a political hot potato, it started to look very difficult for the Rovers to relocate with the Juniors. Because if they did, everyone would know that the separation between the clubs was just a scam.

Candy Broad continued to do nothing. The dust settled after a few months. The community was worn down – all their efforts had been unsuccessful. Despite their letters to Candy and the assistance of John Vogels, Candy resisted all attempts to do anything about this rort. She was a real Labor Unity trooper throughout all this. She weathered the storm, and secured Natalie’s family their nice little soccer club.

And the best part to this whole cruel joke? After the dust had settled, what do you think Natalie did? Stay tuned.

Labor dominated Brimbank Council screws the community (72)

2006-09-14T06:30:00.000+10:00

Yesterday, I gave you some initial insights into the decision to relocate the Albion Rovers soccer club to Cairnlea Park. Today I continue down this path of intrigue.

The Albion Rovers’ history is not pretty. Given the club's appalling history, even the Brimbank CEO didn’t want to support the club's request for relocation to a permanent site in Brimbank. In a memorandum from the Chief Executive Officer, Marilyn Duncan, to Councillor Natalie Suleyman (dated 23 September 2003), Ms Duncan clearly outlines her reluctance to support the Albion Rovers Soccer Club’s request for relocation. The request came from the Albion Rovers, on Albion Rovers letterhead, but the request was for the relocation of the Albion Juniors, which adds a strange little twist to this tale.

Marilyn's memo had a report attached, providing justification for why the Council should not support the Albion Rovers application for relocation. There are two things that stand out in this report. The first is the dreadful history of the Albion Rovers Soccer Club—whatever name it has been known by. The Council’s own assessment of this club is that it was a “bad tenant”, and that it owed money to the Brimbank City Council for outstanding debts relating to the club’s previous use of Selwyn Park.

The report also indicates that Melton Council had written off a debt of $14,000 as a result of its tenancy arrangements with the Albion Rovers Soccer club.

The second thing that is notable in the report is that the Albion Rovers Soccer club has a history of changing its name, not unlike a phoenix company (you know the ones; they do something dodgy, then fold, only to rise again as a new company, but with all of the same dodgy directors). And, interestingly, Council officers were very concerned about this.

The report states:
Recent correspondence from the club is on Albion Rovers Soccer Club letterhead and the Victorian Soccer Federation website’s 2003 details for the Junior Soccer Club list the same secretary and mailing address as for the Albion Rovers Soccer Club but different Presidents and Liaison Officers.

The report goes on to say:
There is a need to identify whether the Albion Rovers Soccer Club and the Albion Rovers Junior Soccer Club are in fact two different bodies wanting to remain separate or if they are effectively one and seeking a new home for the whole club or one seeking a new home for its junior activities only.

What appears to have happened is that the Albion Rovers, knowing that they had a bad reputation, tried to make out that the Albion Juniors was a separate entity. This was something that council officers themselves clearly didn’t believe, as they questioned the legitimacy of the separation between the Juniors and Seniors.

Marilyn Duncan herself expressed concern regarding this matter. But later she changed her tune, but there is no clear reason as to why this happened. Maybe Natalie had a few words to her…..

Anyway, Natalie voted, along with other Councillors, to move the Albion Junior Soccer Club to Cairnlea Park. And this vote also included a commitment of $650,000 to redevelop the Park, with new soccer fields and club rooms. Of course, at the time of the vote, she didn’t mention the fact that her brother was on the committee of management for the Rovers. And the Rovers openly acknowledged that the Juniors and Rovers were one and the same club.

When the pressure hit Council about this issue, after a nosey reporter started asking questions about this, Natalie dug her heels in and swore black and blue that the Rovers and Juniors were separate clubs.

But why was the club itself claiming that both the Albion Juniors and Rovers were one and the same club?

Of course, it was in Natalie's interest to claim that the clubs were separate, because if they were one and the same (which they actually were, and continue to be), you'd have to question why a Council was bending over backwards to provide them with such a lucrative relocation deal. After all, wasn't this a club that still owed $14,000 to a sister Council?

More about this tomorrow. Tomorrow, you can find out how the Cairnlea community, in Labor's heartland, had to turn to the Opposition for assistance with this. There was no way Labor was going to do anything about this. Complaining to Candy Broad, the Minister for Local Government, was a futile exercise, something the Cairnlea community understands only too well now.

Labor's favour to the Albion Rovers (73)

2006-09-13T06:21:00.000+10:00

The move of the Albion Rovers Soccer to Cairnlea Park is a fine example of the injustice perpetrated on Labor’s heartland by a Party driven by self interest.

Cairnlea is a new suburb (near St.Albans) that has been developed by Vic Urban, and Cairnlea Park sits within this new suburb. When residents bought into the area they were conned by Vic Urban’s promises that the park would be developed into a “multi-use sporting complex”. The Vic Urban promise would have been factored into their decision making process when they bought into the area. The promise of a multi-use sporting facility would have been a nice bonus to buying into this new suburb.

Unfortunately, the new residents would have known little about the deal making that Labor was doing behind the scenes.

So what about the Albion Rovers, the other part of this equation? The Albion Rovers have a disgraceful track record. For example, information obtained through an FOI request shows that the club had a lease arrangement with Melton Council in the late 1990s. This lease was terminated when the club decided to relocate back into Brimbank. Melton Council had to write off an outstanding debt by the club for thousands of dollars. In addition, Melton Council had spent more than $400,000 developing the ground at Melton, an investment they made to accommodate the Albion Rovers as a long-term tenant.

Of course, the Melton Council was not to know that the Suleymans were intricately involved in the soccer club, and also intricately involved with the Brimbank Council. The Suleymans wanted the Rovers back in Brimbank. And what they want, they usually get, with the full backing of the State government, it would seem.

So how are the Suleymans involved with the Albion Rovers Soccer club? The Suleymans have tried to distance themselves from the club now, but Hakki Suleyman was previously the Public Officer of the club, and Mehmet Suleyman (Hakki’s son) was also a Committee of Management member of the club. Mehmet was removed as a Committee of Management member when this issue blew up in the local media. The Suleymans clearly have a strong association with this club.

The Suleymans are are intricately involved with the ALP in Victoria. Hakki Suleyman works for Justin Madden. Natalie Suleyman, when she is not being the Mayor of Brimbank, works for Andre Haermeyer. And Mehmet Suleyman also works for Labor MPs. The Suleymans are also intricately involved with the Brimbank City Council (for example, it’s common for Hakki to coach Natalie from the public gallery during council meetings), and they are intricately involved with the Albion Rovers Soccer club.

When the Cairnlea community became aware of the proposal to move the Albion Rovers to Cairnlea Park, they rallied and obtained more than 700 signatures from Cairnlea residents, objecting to the move. That’s a lot of signatures for a small community in a new suburb. But the petition was next to useless. The Suleymans had decided what was going to happen and nothing was going to stop them. With the full backing of the Labor government, including Candy Broad and John Lenders, they could get away with murder. And they did.

Tomorrow I’ll tell you more about this, including the public money involved in helping the Suleymans get what they wanted.

The Community Destroyer visits Sunshine (74)

2006-09-12T06:30:00.000+10:00

The Community Destroyer, Bruce Mildenhall (the current MLA for Footscray) visited Sunshine last Saturday morning for a number of pre-booked meetings with residents at Cafe 0ne24. His replacement for the seat of Footscray, Marsha Thomson, tagged along with him.

The Destroyer sent out letters to residents a couple of weeks prior to these cafe confrontations and invited them to book in for a chat over a cafe latte. Most of the residents who wanted to speak to Bruce couldn't get a meeting, as all the available timeslots were taken up in no time flat by residents who were desperate to give the Destoyer a piece of their mind.

Apparently, the Destroyer listened to resident after resident telling him what they thought about the dreadful state of public transport, pokie machines, and of course, the sorry state of the Sunshine Pool, with water space set to be halved under Bruce's leadership.

Bruce started the meetings with all smiles, but after copping this barrage, apparently, he looked noticeably unnerved by the end of all these meetings. And apparently, Marsha sat there the whole time bearing a close resemblance to a mullet that has been stunned by a whack over the head. The look on her face said it all. It was like, "what the F$%^ck have you done to these people, Bruce?"

It wouldn't surprise me if, after hearing the horror stories, Marsha wanted to scream out at Bruce herself, "you are a Community Destroyer! What sort of god damned legacy are you leaving me with, man."

Of course, Bruce doesn't care. He's done the job Labor asked him to do and that's all that matters to him. They told him to keep the community at bay, while Labor went and spent the money on the marginals. On that account he can be proud. He's done a sterling job. Now he can jump off the sinking ship knowing that someone else will have to clean up his trail of destruction.

What a Broad (75)

2006-09-11T06:31:00.000+10:00

Of course, Municipal Councils throughout Victoria could not get away with the shenanigans they are getting away with if they didn't have a broad like Candy to support them. That is, unless the Municipal Council is dominated by Liberals.

The Liberal dominated Glen Eira Council was sacked last year, just months prior to the Council election. All the Councillors were removed from their positions following an investigation into their inappropriate phone usage.

But if you are a Councillor in a Labor dominated Council, you can sleep easy. Candy Broad, the Minister for Local Government, has set the bar far higher for Labor dominated Councils. Phone discrepancies in Liberal dominated Councils can bring the whole house down, but not so in a Labor dominated Council.

We all know that Mayor Natalie Suleyman of the Brimbank Council has been getting away with whatever she wants to get away with, with the full blessing of this broad. Candy must be sick of the letters she receives from the Brimbank community, because she gets plenty. There are the ones she gets about Natalie's extroardinarily high mobile phone bills (the highest of all Councillors in Victoria). No need for an investigation into this, according to Candy.

Then there's the regular letters she gets about Natalie doing a deal for a soccer club associated with her (Natalie's) father and brother. This was a real Suleyman special. Natalie voted to move the Albion Rovers to Cairnlea Park, with the Council agreeing to tip in more than $650,000 for the development of new club rooms and soccer grounds. Natalie's brother Mehmet was on the Committee of Management of this soccer club when the vote was taken, but of course, she did not declare a conflict of interest. And Natalie's father used to be a Public Officer of the same club, some years back. But it's all good according to Candy.

Then of course, there's the Council owned property in Biggs Street, St.Albans, which was used rent free for 4 years by an association linked to Natalie's father. The circumstances are all very peculiar, but again, it's all good according to Candy.

The Brimbank Councillors must love this broad. She really is something. She'll go to great lengths to protect her mates.

Disadvantaged communities forced to unite against Labor (76)

2006-09-10T12:58:00.000+10:00

It would seem that disadvantaged communities are beginning to unite together to fight Labor's blatant discrimination against them. They have no choice.

For example, Footscray, Sunshine, and Oakleigh are joining forces to fight the blatant discrimination that occurs in Labor's heartland. These communities have joined forces to form the Melbourne Pools Alliance. They could just as easily have formed an alliance to do something about the atrocious situation with Pokie machines, or public transport in their communities.

Why is it that Labor is so hell bent on closing community pools in disadvantaged areas? Where's the logic? As previously reported, Footscray's pool was closed down and sold, using the combined forces of a Labor dominated Council, and Bruce Mildenhall's failure to properly represent the community he was elected to represent. Of course, in Sunshine there's a similar story. Using the combined forces of a Labor dominated Council, and Bruce Mildenhall's failure to properly represent the community, Sunshine has been fighting a losing battle. Labor is giving this community no hope of ever replacing the water space it has lost. Labor has made a choice to downgrade the aquatic facilities in this community to a wading pool, which will amount to less than 1/2 the water space the community lost 14 years ago. That's when the outdoor 5o metre pool was closed, with promises by a Labor Council and Government that it would be fixed and re-opened.

And Oakleigh, another Labor stonghold is fighting a Labor dominated Council and the Labor government, to stop them closing down their outdoor pool complex, forever. They're currently going through the shock and disbelief stage in Oakleigh, as they come to grips with Labor's community pool destruction program, specially designed for disadvantaged communities; a real Labor special.

Labor has forced the hand of these communities. Labor wants to give them nothing. That's obvious. They want to continue their practice of spending the money in the marginals. That's obvious, too.

It's only by fighting harder than they've ever had to fight before, against Labor's tacit discrimination policy, that these communities will get the services and facilities that other communities take for granted. That's also obvious.

Rumours are rife that George Seitz will go (77)

2006-09-09T17:33:00.000+10:00

Apparently, rumours are rife throughout the Labor Party that George Seitz will be dumped in the next few weeks. If this happens, it will not happen because of Labor's abhorrence for branch stackers; we know the dominant Labor Unity faction loves them. If it happens, it will happen because Labor is dragged kicking and screaming to find a solution to all the unrest within the Party over this issue.

They will hate doing it, with a passion, because they love branch stackers, with a passion. But if they have to do it, they'll do it, in the interests of protecting all other branch stackers. They'll sacrifice one for the good of the others. Bracks and Shorten will probably have a bit of a cry together and console each other after the decision's been made. Shorten will say, "oh well, we had to sacrifice one of our own, for the good of the Party". And Bracks will reply, " yes, it's very sad, but at least we've still got Telmo. He'll just have to step up to the plate."

Seitz should have been dumped years ago. Everybody knows that. To dump him because of internal pressure, rather than because it is the right thing to do (and has been for many years) will only serve to confirm what a basket case this Party now is.

This is just another reason to put Labor last.

Labor Council gets away with murder (78)

2006-09-08T06:26:00.000+10:00

Brimbank City Council is at it again. This time, as reported on the front page of the Brimbank Leader (5 September 2006), Council employees have racked up $90,000 in credit card bills for the month of July.

In most responsible organisations, credit cards are only provided to a select few managers and employees. But we all know this Council does things differently; every man, woman and their dogs have credit cards in this organisation. Brimbank provides its employees with 84 of these credit cards, and my god, don't they like to use them!

They're having a wonderful time going to aerobics, the movies, buying fast food, flowers, and of course, plenty of grog.

This Council is an absolute disgrace and certainly provides a compelling argument for the re-introduction of commissioners.

Of course, as par for the course, the community will write letters to Bracks, to Candy Broad (the Minister for Local Government), and the local do-nothing MPs. They always do. And what will be done? You know the answer, nothing of course.

Christmas comes early for Seitz, very early (79)

2006-09-07T06:24:00.000+10:00

George Seitz, the Member for Keilor is getting in early for Christmas, very early!

In an undated letter Seitz sent out to his constituents, which was received by some people on 5 September, almost 4 months prior to Christmas, Seitz states:

"As the festive season approaches and 2006 comes to an end, Elenor and I wish you and your family a happy Christmas and all the best for 2007."

Maybe Seitz is celebrating Christmas 4 months early because he can't believe his luck. Despite all the publicity he's received about his branch stacking racket, he's escaped unscathed and will once again contest the coming election as the ALP endorsed candidate for the seat of Keilor.

Of course it helps to have friends like Bill Shorten, who chaired the meeting of the administrative committee, which decided to exempt Seitz from Labor's rule that requires MPS to retire at 65. This rule would have prevented Seitz from contesting the coming election, but he's been looked after nicely by his mates, Billy Shorten and Steve Bracks.

No wonder he's celebrating early. He gets away with the biggest branch stacking racket in Victoria, details of which were plastered all over the front page of the Age in May. And he gets an exemption from Labor's rules, which would have prevented him from contesting the coming election.

Merry Christmas Seitzy.

Why is everybody up in arms about Melbourne 2030? (80)

2006-09-06T06:30:00.000+10:00

In the last post we discussed the Labor government's Melbourne 2030 policy; today we continue this theme.

The Labor government explains that Activity Centres will be "linked by an improved and expanded public transport network".

In many of the Principal Activity Centres throughout Melbourne, communities are having a major problem preventing high-rise developments, as these developments are being approved under the guise of Melbourne 2030. When planning approvals are opposed at the Council level, developers are applying to VCAT and in many instances VCAT is approving the developments, in the interest of Melbourne 2030.

In effect, Melbourne 2030 is a green light for developers to build high-rise residential towers in the Activity Centres. Basically, for the developers, it's a free for all. They're loving it! Local Council's might do everything they can to prevent the developments, only to have their decisions overturned by VCAT.

So the developers are getting these controversial approvals through VCAT now. Today. It's been happening for a long time now, ever since the introduction of Melbourne 2030 about 3 years ago.

In many of the communities where these developments are being proposed they are highly controversial, because in many instances the communities don't want them. And it's not uncommon for Councils to oppose the developments, consistent with the community sentiment. But the developers are getting their approvals through anyway, through VCAT.

From VCAT's perspective, their decisions have to be consistent with the policies and legislation of the government of the day. And right now, Melbourne 2030 is one of the government's major policy initiatives. So in Victoria the legislative framework is supporting the development of residential high-rises, high density living, approvals for 2nd houses on small house blocks, etc, all in the interest of achieving the Melbourne 2030 objectives.

As I said, this is happening now. Today. But where's the public transport infrastructure to support the high-density living? That's not there now. In many cases, the plans for public transport insfrastructure to support all this growth are vague or non-existent.

The Sydenham train line is a good case in point, as it winds its way through a number of these Activity Centres. This line is at bursting point, now. Today. And apart from 2 additional train services in the short-term, any upgrade to this line is planned for the long term. In fact, it's so long term that, with this government's track record, many wonder if it will happen at all.

So what's the story? Why's the government allowing all these highrises to be built in our suburbs, without adequate infrastructure? Why is the government allowing all these additional people to be crowded into these centres, when the infrastructure has not been developed to support them?

Is it any wonder that people across Melbourne see red when they hear the term "Melbourne 2030"? They've had enough time to digest what Melbourne 2030 is really about.

Let's be fair! If you're going to screw us by taking away our rights to veto all this development in our neighbourhoods, at least give us the other part of the equation. Give us the infrastructure to go with the development. It's only fair, isn't it?

Where is the fairness in the way Melbourne 2030 is being applied currently?

Melbourne 2030: Just another Labor recipe for disaster (81)

2006-09-05T06:30:00.000+10:00

Is it any wonder that the Labor government has created another policy debacle with its Melbourne 2030 plan? As has become the norm with Labor, their spin on this is so different from reality, you have to engage in some serious “spin decoding” to understand what they’re really trying to achieve with this.

On their Melbourne 2030 website, the Labor government states that “In the next 30 years, Melbourne will grow by up to one million people and will consolidate its reputation as one of the most liveable.” Fair enough. So what to do?

According to the Labor government:

Melbourne 2030 is a plan for the growth and development of the metropolitan area. An important objective is to ensure that Melbourne retains the qualities that people enjoy about it. Despite a slowdown in population growth, Melbourne will grow substantially over the next 30 years. It is appropriate to plan for the capacity to comfortably absorb up to 620,000 extra households over that time while protecting and enhancing our existing suburbs.

So what’s the answer?

A whole lot of Principal Activity Centres and regular Activity Centres have been targeted to become high-density accommodation zones throughout Melbourne. Basically what this means is a lot more highrise living throughout Melbourne.

It’s clear that the green space in Melbourne will be reduced under this plan. Much more of the currently available land in Melbourne will be taken up by buildings (a process known as "in-fill"). For example, two houses on fair sized backyards, with trees, etc., might be torn down to make way for apartments, with the majority of the previous green space being taken up by buildings, concrete driveways, and pathways (ie. much reduced green space). Multiply this affect across Melbourne and imagine the sort of city it will create: progressively less green space, less trees, less open spaces, less parkland.

And there is growing evidence that VCAT believes it has a mandate (as a consequence of Melbourne 2030) to approve high density building developments in Activity Centres. There are plenty of examples of building developments being opposed by local Councils, which are then overturned by VCAT, based on its Melbourne 2030 mandate.

But the really sad part, the part that is lost in all of Labor’s “spin”, is that Labor’s plans for these “Activity Centres” contain no concrete commitments for improved government facilities, services, and infrastructure, to cope with all the extra people living in these Activity Centres.

The approvals for highrise accommodation are very concrete. Communities can’t stop this. Their attempts are overturned by VCAT. Communities throughout Melbourne are experiencing these “Melbourne 2030” affects on a weekly basis. The affects are very real, and very concrete. We feel them in our communities. We read about Council decisions being overturned by VCAT all the time. Highrise approvals in the suburbs are being approved all the time, and no-one can stop them. It’s all part of Labor’s grand 2030 plan.

So this part of 2030 is very clear. We all know that highrises are coming to our neighbourhoods, soon. So that’s clear and concrete and we can’t stop it. The Labor government has made that clear.

But ask the government about what it plans in terms of infrastructure to support all of these additional people, all these extra people living in the highrises in our suburbs. It’s quite a contrast. In comparison to Labor’s concrete plans for more and more highrises in the suburbs, Labor’s plans for the infrastructure to support all these extra people is vague, and uncertain at best. Nailing them down on what they’re going to do to support all these extra people is like nailing jelly to the wall. Try and get some concrete information about the additional money Labor is going to put into recreation, public transport, health, and education, to go with all their lovely highrises, and see how far you’ll get. You’ll get nowhere. Because Melbourne 2030 is truly a farce; it’s just another Labor government farce.

Their wonderfully colourful documents on Melbourne 2030 (you know the ones, the standard Labor government spin) have been designed to placate the Victorian community. Minus the spin, they mean: highrises coming to a neighbourhood near you; more and more people; less and less services.

Melbourne 2030: just another Labor recipe for disaster.

Labor's accusations (82)

2006-09-04T18:30:00.000+10:00

A number of Labor MPs, such as Noel Pullen the Victorian MP for the upper house seat of Higginbotham, have been emailing Put Labor Last, accusing us of peddling lies and bull dust.

People like Noel Pullen are part of the problem. They stick their heads in the sand while their Party collapses around them. Branch stacking is going on in serious proportions within the Labor Party. People like Noel Pullen can stick their heads in the sand and pretend it is not going on, but it is.

You're a parasite, Noel. Labor's rules prohibit branch stacking and prescribe serious penalties for those who engage in it. But the practice is rife and everybody knows it. Labor conveniently ignores the problem. People like you are only adding to the destruction of the Party by sticking your head in the sand and attacking those that would seek to have something done about the problem. You are a disgrace.

Why are all you MPs strangely silent about the major branch stacking problem that Labor has? Don't be a parasite, Noel. Fight to change the rules and allow branch stacking as a legitimate practice. Or, fight to stamp out the problem. Don't stand on the sidelines and attack anyone who tries to do something about the problem, you parasite. Are you benefiting from branch stacking, Noel? Is that why you've been strangely silent about it?

Branch stacking is going on in serious proportions. John Cain has highlighted this as a major problem and people like you stick your head in the sand about it. Why do you side with the branch stackers? If you like the practice so much and think there is nothing wrong with it, tell us. Campaign to change the rules. Don't attack people like us who are trying to clean the Party up.

Not only did John Cain say it, the Administrative Committee has also presented some damning findings on branch stacking in Victoria. And of course, Craig Otte has revealed some home truths about it as well. It's strange how the story coming out is so consistent, yet you think it's all bull dust. It's all true Noel. It's not bull dust. And nothing is being done about it. That's true too, Noel, and you know it.

The situation at the Furlong Road crossing is also true. It's a Labor Party disgrace.

The so called "Labor" Councillors in Brimbank that refused to condemn Howard's IR laws, even when given a second chance, is also true and real. And their strong connections with Victorian MPs is also true. That's not bull dust either. Who the hell knows what the ALP really stands for anymore, Noel?

For Christ's sake, Noel. We have to rely on Baillieu, the toff from Toorak to advocate for cuts to pokie machines in Victoria. Labor refuses to cut Pokie machines even though they're destroying our communities. That's true too. What the hell is going on with this topsy turvy Party, Noel?!

Instead of standing on the sidelines attacking people for telling some home truths about Labor, why don't you stand up and be counted, Noel, you parasite?

Newsflash: Labor to change its rules to allow branch stacking (83)

2006-09-03T06:34:00.000+10:00

Sorry, I’m only joking! It’s not true. It’s just a joke, just like the Victorian ALP's rules which prohibit branch stacking and prescribe severe penalties for those who engage in it. In fact, the entire Victorian ALP is a joke, a cruel joke.

It really is farcical because we know no-one complies with the ALP's rules. Branch stacking is rife in Victoria's ALP and the Party has no desire to fix the problem, that's clear.

Unfortunately, the joke’s on us. Despite repeated efforts from within the Party and from outside the Party, the ALP vigorously resists every attempt to fix this problem. Obviously, too many of the current Labor MPs have benefited from the practice.

Fine. So why not change the rules to allow branch stacking? Let's legitimise the current situation by changing the rules to reflect what (almost) everybody in the ALP wants anyway: a free for all on branch stacking. It's happening anyway. It's embraced at every level within the ALP, so what's the difference? Change the rules to reflect the desire of the Party and current reality.

You know it makes sense.

The Toff and Footscray pool (84)

2006-09-02T14:40:00.000+10:00

While Labor is advocating for the closure of pools, especially in its heartland, again, it’s been the Toff from Toorak who has been advocating to save community pools. Why do disadvantaged communities have to rely on the Libs to advocate on their behalf now? What the hell is going on in the ALP?

Baillieu attended a Save Footscray Pool rally a number of years ago. He was fighting alongside the Footscray community to save the pool from closure. Why is it that traditional Labor voters now have to rely on the Toff to advocate on their behalf? Meanwhile, Labor MPs like Mildenhall continue to wage their war against communities they are meant to represent, by fighting all attempts to save the pool.

Why is it that Labor’s out closing pools down in disadvantaged communities, like Footscray and Sunshine (with thanks to destructive MPs like Mildenhall)? Meanwhile, disadvantaged communities are having to rely on the likes of Baillieu to advocate on their behalf.

What the hell has happened to Labor?

The Toff from Toorak fighting for disdvantaged communities (85)

2006-09-02T13:54:00.000+10:00

It's ironic, isn't it? The so called people's Party, "Labor", a traditional advocate for the disadvantaged, is now addicted to pokie revenue, which largely comes from the most disadvantaged people in our communities, thereby creating further disadvantage.

Disadvantaged communities are suffering terribly from the devastating effects of pokie machines. The Labor Government skirts around the edges, pretending to be responsible, by spending a tiny fraction of its pokie revenue on a "responsible gambling" advertising campaign. Meanwhile our most disadvantaged communities continue to suffer from the effects of pokies. Labor refuses to do anything about this glaring social problem.

Strangely, it's the Liberals who are now advocating to cut pokie machine numbers, which are disproportionately located in disdadvantaged communities, in Labor's heartland. The Toff from Toorak, of all people, is now advocating for those in Labor's heartland! There's nothing in it for him in the safe Labor seats where all the problem gambling occurs, but he's doing it anyway.

Labor's created such a gaping whole in the heartland it has deserted. There are no policies to fix the problem; instead there's plenty of neglect and plenty of money going from the pockets of the disadvantaged into Labor's coffers. So it hasn't been hard for the Toff from Toorak to come in and fill the gaping whole left by Labor. He doesn't have to do much, but the little he does is a stark contrast to Labor's nothing.

It really is a bizarre turn of events. The Toff from Toorak is now advocating for the disadvantaged, while Labor continues to rape and pillage in the safe Labor seats.

Defections to grow (86)

2006-09-01T17:37:00.000+10:00

Labor will continue to experience defections, particularly in its heartland. The ALP in Victoria is a basket case.

Increasingly people are realising that the Labor Party has morphed into something grotesque. It no longer represents what it used to represent. It is no longer the people's party.

The ALP in Victoria is trading on its historically good name. People will keep voting Labor only as long as this goodwill holds out. The irony is, the goodwill was not created by those running the party now. All they are doing is eroding it. They're parasites, surviving on the goodwill created by others. By the time they've finished sucking the life out of the party all that will be left is a corpse.

Labor supports Howard's IR laws in Victoria (87)

2006-08-30T06:30:00.000+10:00

We're counting down the reasons why you should put Labor last at the coming election. With 87 days to go, this is reason 87: Labor's support for Howard's IR laws.

Howard sure is a shrewd operator. He knew he was on a good thing with Tampa and he knows he is on a good thing with these IR Laws. Given time, he will even win over the ALP with these laws. After all, he’s already made some real headway in Victoria. He just has to bide his time and the ALP will implode, as those within the ALP who love these laws slowly reveal their true colours, and embrace these laws, as they have in the city of Brimbank.

On 22 August 2006, the Brimbank City Council’s sole Greens’ Councillor presented a motion, that stated:

the council condemns the Federal government’s so called WorkChoices legislation; and that
council believes that the legislation will be significantly detrimental to the living standards of the residents of Brimbank.

Councillor Dymott repeated the motion, and the Mayor, Natalie Suleyman asked if there were any councillors who would second the motion. The motion was defeated because no-one would second the motion.

So what happened here? Ten councillors effectively indicated their support for Howard's IR laws. They gave no indication to the contrary. Given the opportunity to condemn the laws, they chose to remain silent. Kim Beazley is out there telling the Australian public that he will tear up these laws. In Brimbank, the Labor councillors want Kim to rack off. They like the laws. But is it just the ALP councillors who like these laws? Is this sentiment more widespread within the ALP? Afterall, these councillors are closely aligned with a number of State MPs.

Brimbank City Council is made up of 11 Councillors, 10 of whom are Labor Councillors, proudly Labor, many of them proudly endorsed by State MPs. For example, the Mayor Natalie Suleyman works for Andre Haermeyer, a Minister in the Bracks Government. Haermeyer even assisted Natalie on election day in November 2005, by handing out How to Vote cards and making it clear that Natalie was “his girl”. A vote for Natalie was a vote for a friend of Haermeyer. A vote for Natalie was a vote for the ALP.

Councillor Sam David is clearly associated with MPs at both the State and Federal level. For example, prior to the Council election, a joint letter from Brendan O’Connor (the Federal Member for Gorton), Bruce Mildenhall (the State Member for Footscray), and Telmo Languiller (the State Member for Derrimut) was sent to all residents of the Ward that Sam was standing for in the election. The State and Federal MPs endorsed Sam David for a position on Council and urged residents to vote for him.

And if Councillor Costas Socratous’s election paraphernalia was anything to go by, he had the support of Premier Steve Bracks himself! The flyers he distributed during his election campaign had a photo of him with Steve Bracks and Telmo Languiller, and a caption stating “Costas is supported by both state and federal Members of parliament (Above): Costas with Telmo Languiller MP and Steve Bracks, Premier of Victoria”.

And of course, Telmo was handing out How to Vote cards for Councillor Socratous on Election Day last year.

I could go on. Suffice to say that every election booth throughout Brimbank during last year’s Council election resembled an ALP convention. The MPs were out in force, supporting their candidates, and making it clear to voters who they should vote for. ALP paraphernalia and How to Vote cards were prolific. Well, their strategy obviously worked. Brimbank’s got 10 of these proud Labor Councillors, fully supported and fully endorsed by the Victorian ALP.

On 22 August 2006, these 10 Labor councillors made it clear that they fully support Howard’s IR Laws. They refused to support the motion put by Councillor Dymott, even after it was put to them a second time.

The obvious question is, does the sentiment of these 10 councillors reflect a view that is more widely held within the Victorian ALP? Or is this simply a view held by these 10 councillors and the MPs who they are so closely associated with?

Labor voters in Victoria have a right to know how widespread the support for Howard’s IR Laws is within the ALP.

Labor's Brimbank City Council: a protected species (88)

2006-08-29T19:08:00.000+10:00

As reported in the Sunday Age, Brimbank's Mayor, Natalie Suleyman has achieved another first! This time it's a record for the most exhorbitant mobile phone expenditure in a 12 month period. Yes, Suleyman came in at number one, with $9,544 expenditure for 12 months, Brimbank's Mayor had the highest annual mobile phone bill of all Councillors in Victoria.

Interestingly, Suleyman's record expenditure was higher than all of Brimbank's other Councillors combined (currently there are 11 Councillors in Brimbank - and there were 9 Councillors in total prior to the November 2005 elections). The combined expenditure for all of the other Brimbank Councillors for the same 12 month period was $8,950! How is this possible? She has spent more than all of the other Councillors combined.

The Liberal dominated Glen Eira Council was sacked last year largely as a result of unexplained discrepancies relating to mobile phone bills. The Labor government is demonstrating quite clearly that it has double standards. Brimbank Council is a protected Council. The government is refusing to conduct an inquiry into mobile phone usage, and they are refusing to investigate Natalie Suleyman's extraordinary mobile phone expenses. Why? It appears that the Labor dominated Brimbank Council is a protected species.

The Western Suburbs of Melbourne: neglect of education by Labor (89)

2006-08-28T23:25:00.000+10:00

In the previous two posts I highlighted some of the research findings from a 2004 report titled Investing in Melbourne’s West, by Professor Peter Sheehan and Professor John Wiseman from Victoria University. In this post, I reveal another of Sheehan and Wiseman’s research findings, this time in relation to education.

Sheehan and Wiseman state that, “the Victorian Government also spends about $30 million less per annum on schools in the western region than it would on state-wide per capita averages. This is largely because of the low proportion of students (60 percent) in government schools and the high proportion (30 percent in Catholic schools, together with the low level of support for non-government schools.”

Why does this Labor government continue to neglect its supposed "heartland" in the western suburbs of Melbourne?

The Western Suburbs of Melbourne: an ongoing story of Labor neglect (90)

2006-08-28T23:21:00.000+10:00

In the previous post I highlighted some of the research findings from a 2004 report titled Investing in Melbourne’s West, by Professor Peter Sheehan and Professor John Wiseman from Victoria University. In this post, I reveal more of these findings.

With regard to Regional and Hospital services in the western suburbs of Melbourne, Sheehan and Wiseman found that residents have a higher incidence of disease than other areas of Melbourne (using a measure based on the incidence of illness per 1000 residents).

Despite this greater incidence of illness, the western suburbs of Melbourne (Labor’s heartland) has inferior medical facilities in comparison to other parts of Victoria. Sheehan and Wiseman indicate that the western suburbs of Melbourne contain12% of the state’s population. This means that if medical facilities were distributed equitably, the western suburbs should contain approximately 12% of the medical facilities. But this is not the case. “For example, 8% of Victorian hospital separations are from hospitals in the western region, while only 5.9 % of intensive care beds (HDU and ICU) are in the region. It is still true that, for many of the advanced hospital services, residents of the West must depend on the facilities of inner Melbourne (p.35).”

The Western Suburbs of Melbourne: a story of Labor neglect (91)

2006-08-28T23:08:00.000+10:00

Traditionally, electorates that fall within the western suburbs of Melbourne have been amongst the safest Labor seats in all of Victoria. Is it a mere coincidence that, in terms of government funding, these suburbs have also traditionally been amongst the most neglected in all of Melbourne? The Bracks' Government has continued this tradition in fine style, and may go down in history as the most neglectful, of all the governments that have preceded it.

It would seem that Labor takes its heartland for granted these days and has no qualms about sacrificing the lives of those in the western suburbs in order to gain political advantage in the marginal seats throughout Victoria. It is taking a long time for the voters of the West to wake up this stark reality, but they are slowly waking up to the realities of life under a Labor government.

There's plenty of evidence of Labor's neglect in the west. Take for example, Victoria University's 2004 report titled Investing in Melbourne’s West, by Professor Peter Sheehan and Professor John Wiseman. While Sheehan and Wiseman steer clear of political arguments or political blame, their analysis of the dreadful funding inequities that the people of the west experience begs the question, “who is responsible for this neglect?” Labor has represented these suburbs for decades, since the early 1900s in most cases. The situation highlighted by Sheehan and Wiseman is an indictment on the Labor party and its abysmal representation of its constituents in the West.

Here’s what Sheehan and Wiseman had to say about Physical activity, sport and recreation. "The proportion of the population participating in organised sport and recreation in the West in 2001-02 was 34.3 percent, 13 percent (or 5.1 percentage points) lower than for Victoria as a whole (39.4 percent) (p.21)".

In their interpretation of these findings, Sheeham and Wiseman explain that “this is likely to be partly due to the direct and indirect effects of limited facilities” (p.9). They go on to explain that “this is yet another sign of the need to build both social structures and community facilities to provide adequate support for individuals and families in the West” (p21 & 22).

The process of obtaining funding for new sporting and recreational facilities in western electorates is different to the process you would follow in most other electorates. As those in the west have come to understand, the process for approval involves many years of intense lobbying, and approvals can be correlated to the “embarrassment factor”. The lobbying must embarrass Labor— by highlighting the glaring inequities to the government, opposition, and community at large—and only when lobbying achieves this is there any possibility of funding being approved.

Languiller's very own Berlin Wall (92)

2006-08-25T06:34:00.000+10:00

Here's another one in Telmo Languiller's electorate. In the heart of St.Albans, the railway crossing and traffic lights that divide Main Road West and Main Road East, represent one of the worst traffic quagmires in all of Melbourne. There are so many traffic lights to navigate, as well as a rail crossing, that it is a wonder that anyone can get through this collection of traffic obstacles at all, especially in peak hour.

Coming from Main Road East, you have lights at Alfrieda Street, then lights a block later at St. Albans Road, immediately before the railway crossing, then the railway crossing, then lights immediately after the railway crossing at West Esplanade. As a consequence, crossing from the East to the West (or vice versa) and getting through any of the intersections that converge in this entanglement of roads (including the Alfrieda Street/Main Road East intersection; or crossing from St.Albans Road to East Esplanade; or crossing from West Esplanade to McKechnie Street), is an exercise of frustration and despair.

The only other alternatives for getting from the East to the West are, the dangerous Furlong Road railway crossing (which is about 2 1/2 kilometres away), or the Taylors Road railway crossing (also about 2 1/2 kilometres away). Just going through the alternatives in your head, while caught in the Main Road East/West quagmire, is enough to do your head in. Your destination, which is just on the other side of this impossible to cross railway, is such a tease. It's so close, yet so far. As a consequence, the residents have nicknamed this forbidding (approximately 5 kilometre) stretch of railway line, the "Berlin Wall", which effectively creates a massive division between East and West St.Albans.

Again it falls in Telmo Languiller's electorate. Again they've been campaigning for years for something to be done about it. And again, there are no plans to fix it.

Another debacle in Languiller's electorate (93)

2006-08-24T06:24:00.000+10:00

Interestingly, the Sunshine Hospital (which is actually located in St.Albans) also falls in Telmo's electorate. You know what's going to follow don't you? Another example of neglect by the member for Derrimut, who makes his way into the electorate he represents from time to time, when he's not out and about in the vicinity of his own residence, in Albert Park.

There's a carpark across the road from the hospital, but there is no pedestian crossing to enable people to safely get from the carpark to the hospital. So what we have is a situation where, because of the nature of the destination that these people are trying to get to (a hospital - hello Labor!), the people who are crossing the road are going to be more likely than most to need a safe way to cross it--we're talking about mothers carrying sick children; the old and feeble; people with poor eyesight; and people who have trouble hearing the traffic. These people have to put their safety in the hands of the gods, as they dash across busy Furlong Road, sometimes carrying sick babies.

You might have a deja vu when I tell you the next part. Strangely, this problem has a lot of the same characteristics as the Furlong railway crossing, which you can read about in the previous post. Again, we have a number of active members of the community that have been campaigning hard for a pedestrian crossing to be built at this spot, for years now. And again, despite the tragedy that occurred there on 21 June this year, when a mother was killed and her 12 year old daughter was critically injured trying to cross the road, nothing has been done to fix this problem.

Furlong railway crossing: more neglect in Languiller's electorate (94)

2006-08-23T06:00:00.000+10:00

On 5 August 2004, three people were killed when their car got stuck on the Furlong Road railway crossing (in St Albans) and was hit by a train. The next day, the Age (in a story by Selma Milovanovic, Jamie Berry, and Misha Ketchell) reported that “emergency crews were attending an earlier minor crash nearby when the collision occurred.” Then, that same night, following this tragedy, the Age went on to report that “three cars collided near the tracks just before 7pm, with the bonnet of one car caught under the boom gate.”

So, there were three accidents on the same day, at the same level crossing, and one of these was a catastrophic accident in which three people were killed.

Here’s the sad part. Nothing has been done about the crossing and there are no immediate plans to fix it, despite assurances by Transport Minister, Peter Batchelor, to the contrary. Five August 2004 at the Furlong crossing was like a sign from above. The three accidents, including the tragedy, was akin to someone shouting at the Labor government through a megaphone, “do something about this crossing!”

For those that have been campaigning for something to be done about the crossing for years, the tragedy was no surprise. The level crossing is, and has been for many years, an accident waiting to happen. As reported in the Age on 6 August 2004, “residents and local traders said they had been campaigning for years for an underpass to be built at the crossing, which was frequently congested and subject to long delays.”

The residents and traders have known that this intersection is an accident waiting to happen for years. They’d campaigned for years, before the accident. And they’re still campaigning. It seems you have to do a lot of campaigning to get anything done in a safe Labor seat. And even when you do a lot of campaigning, it's not uncommon for nothing to be done.

The Labor government is reaping more than $30 Million per year out of the municipality in pokie taxes, but is giving nothing back; even when faced with a high risk to community safety, as we have with the Furlong crossing.

On 6 August 2004, the day after the tragedy, the Age also reported that, “Transport Minister Peter Batchelor said the Government had already introduced a staged program to "grade separate" - with an underpass or overpass - three major crossings in the St Albans area, including at Furlong Road."

This is more than 2 years ago. When are they going to fix this thing!

The Department of Infrastrucure has confirmed that the Furlong rail crossing is not a priority in terms of "future railway crossing upgrades". In fact, you can read about the government's railway crossing upgrade priorities yourself. Furlong railway crossing, which falls in Telmo Languiller's "super safe" electorate, is strangely absent in Labor's list of priorities.

Is it because the crossing falls in a safe Labor seat? And why did Batchelor say it was going to be fixed? Why hasn’t he done anything about it? And why isn't Telmo doing anything about it? He's the elected member for the area. They say he sometimes even makes his way over from his home in Albert Park into the electorate. Doesn't he realise it hasn't been fixed yet? He should take a drive over to the crossing some day, if he knows where it is, and see the problem first hand.

The Furlong crossing is just another cruel joke that Labor has played on a safe Labor seat, and Telmo is doing nothing about it. Shame on you, Languiller.

Languiller: the West, a nice place to visit but he wouldn't want to stay (95)

2006-08-22T06:30:00.000+10:00

Telmo Languiller, the member for Derrimut, thinks his electorate is a nice place to visit but he wouldn't want to stay. The Derrimut electorate takes in the suburbs of St.Albans, West Sunshine, Sunshine North, Albion, and Ardeer. Telmo thinks it's great being the Local member of this Electorate, as long as he doesn't have to live in there, or in any of the neighbouring western suburbs for that matter.

No, instead he chooses to live in Albert Park. In Albert Park, they recently had a major upgrade to the Melbourne Aquatic Centre. A sign out the front of the centre proudly announces, "come and celebrate our new $104 Million facility". No wonder Telmo wants to live in Albert Park! The Labor Government's pouring money into that suburb. Meanwhile they're closing down pools in the western suburbs of Melbourne.

Suburbs like Albert Park are flush with Labor funded facilities. But in Labor's heartland, the funds have dried up.

Telmo's known as the phantom in the Derrimut electorate. You rarely see him, unless there's a media opportunity, and then he has to be careful not to embarrass himself. For example, he recently had his head in the local paper, proudly announcing a funding approval for the Albion State School. The only problem for Telmo was, he had a Principal making statements that didn't quite seem to fit with Telmo's proud rhetoric. The Principal welcomed the funding, but couldn't understand why the school had been waiting for the funding for 12 years. Telmo should have been hanging his head in shame, but he's a slick operator, so instead he used the old Labor Unity spin. Turn a negative into a positive. The fools will never know.

The Labor Government is taking more than 30 Million annually out of the Brimbank municipality (much of which falls in Telmo's electorate) in pokie tax. But it takes forever to get anything back, to get anything funded. Maybe if Telmo lived in the electorate, he'd push a little bit harder for his constituents. Instead, he's probably pushing hard for better services and facilities in his home suburb of Albert Park. It seems to be working.

It must be a real inconvenience for Telmo, on the odd occasion, when he has to make the trek into his own electorate. He must sometimes make that trek in peak hour, when he would pass some of the over-crowded stations on the Sydenham train line. Afterall, some of them fall in his electorate. I wonder what he does when he passes the stations, where the trains have a remarkable resemblance with cattle-trains? It's not unusual for the trains to be so over-crowded that commuters can't get on. Telmo, probably winds down his window, gives the commuters a little "tally ho" wave, and yells out "keep voting Labor, chaps".

The sad thing is, many of the commuters will continue to vote Labor. They still haven't worked out that the Labor party is now a basket case. Current incumbents, like Telmo, are trading on the currency of Labor's good name. But that currency won't last forever, as more and more people realise the truth about what this party has become.

Haermeyer and the pokie scam (96)

2006-08-21T06:30:00.000+10:00

If you haven't read about Labor's pokie scam, you can read the previous 2 posts to find out how Labor has allowed pokie venues to claim regular business expenses as "community benefits". They're even getting tax breaks as part of the scam!

How did Andre Haemeyer contibute to this scam, you ask? Haermeyer is a major contributor. On 26 June 2003, as Acting Minister for Gaming, Haermeyer released a determination which basically set the ground rules for the scam.

This determination allows venue operators to claim the following as community benefits:

employment expenses of all staff employed by venue operators, including employment expenses of staff in gaming and non-gaming areas, excluding State and Commonwealth taxes.
The provision of fixed assets, other than fixed assets used for gaming purposes.

As a consequence, we've got venues claiming major renovation expenses to their hotels as "community benefits." And regular employee expenses can also be claimed as "community benefits". These employees would have been employed anyway! Pokie licences are licences to print money. In order to rake in the money, these venues have to put on additional employees; they would put the employees on anyway. They're not doing it as a favour to the community. Come on, Andre!

Let's not pretend they're doing us any favours by employing additional staff so that they can rake in more money. But the funny thing is, he's allowed all employee expenses to be claimed as a "community benefit", not just the expenses associated with any additional staff required to administer the gaming. It really is a cruel joke. Andre, please.

In addition, the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation provides examples of the expenses that can be claimed as "community benefits". They actually go into detail about how a venue can't claim heating expenses if those expenses relate to the gaming area. But they can claim heating expenses as a "community benefit" if they relate to heating for non-gaming areas of the venue.

It really is a cruel joke. The venues are actually getting tax breaks for this stuff, so they're double dipping; claiming regular business expenses as "community benefits" and getting tax breaks for it!

Thanks Andre.

Self regulation: the cruel joke Labor plays on disadvantaged communities (97)

2006-08-20T18:00:00.000+10:00

An inquiry was made to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation regarding sham Community Benefit Statements; which many pokie venues are using to claim regular business expenses as “benefits to the community”. Aren't these venues supposed to be giving something back to the community, genuinely? What could be done about it? The answer was, yes these venues are supposed to contribute a fair percentage of their pokie revenue back into the community. But while this is a requirement and the annual reporting of how they are doing this, using Community Benefit Statements, is also a requirement, the industry is "self regulating".

What this means is that if these venues want to rip your community off blind and your community is not organised and active enough to stop them, well there’s nothing the government will do to stop them getting away with it. Self regulation, in this context, basically means it’s up to the community to make sure these venues are accountable; it's not up to the government. Communities have to make sure these venues meet their obligations, because the government won't do it for them.

Maybe the government is getting too much out of pokies to 'rock the boat' with the venues.

A Deakin University study confirms this scam. The Sunday Herald Sun reported on this problem back on 4 September 2005 (p.19), in a story titled "Pokies losses shock". The story outlines the results of the Deakin study, which showed that only 1.4% of the funding generated from pokie losses are being spent back in the communities that have lost this money.

The story claims that these clubs receive an 8.3% tax break on the basis that they make substantial community contributions.

To quote from the story, "Deakin University research shows while venues claimed an average of 18 percent of their gambling profits were spent to benefit the community in 2003-2004, only about 1% actually went to outside causes and groups."

"The rest was going on wages, coffee tables, push mowers, plasma TV screens and office equipment, discounts on drinks and meals and other running costs."

"Professor Hancock said it was just a scam."

Well said, Professor. It’s just another Labor scam.

Labor's Great Pokie Scam (98)

2006-08-19T06:24:00.000+10:00

There was a lot of community angst when pokie machines were introduced into Victoria by a Labor government in 1991. This angst has only increased as the damage that this decision has done to Victorian communities is increasingly realised. For example, a government survey in 2003 found that 85% of Victorians considered gambling to be a serious social problem.

The Bracks' Government’s “smoke and mirrors’ response to this problem is comparable to the ALP’s sham rules on Branch Stacking. It seems that for Labor, all rules are meant to be broken.

Take, for example, the Labor Government’s requirement that the owners of licensed pokie venues submit an annual Community Benefit Statement. The Victorian Commission for Gambling's FAQs provides a good place to start if you want to know what these statements are all about. Basically, one of the major purposes of Community Benefit Statements is to let the community know the benefits that the local venue’s gaming revenue provides to the community.

The venues that have been granted pokie licences are required to contribute a certain amount of their revenue back into the community, for the benefit of the community, to develop the community. This concept makes sense. While this evil should never have been unleashed on Victorians, now that it has, let's make sure the venue owners that are causing all this damage are also contibuting to some development of the communities where this evil has been unleashed, to offset some of the damage. So that's the basic idea, and Community Benefit Statements provide communities with some insight into how these venues are developing our communities.

So what’s actually happening? What are these venues spending their "community benefit" money on? How are they benefiting their communities?

Let’s have a look at how the Glengala Hotel, which falls in the suburb of West Sunshine (Telmo Languiller’s electorate - surprise, surprise!), supposedly “contributed to the community” in the 2003/2004 financial year.

This is a sample of the Glengala Hotel's Community Benefit Statement for the Financial Year Ended 30 June 2004.

These items are apparently (somehow!) benefiting our community. These figures were obtained directly from the Victorian Commission for Gambling's website: Community Benefit Statements

New Cameras for security system $926
Fisher & Paykel N388LT Freezer $784
New Menu Board $270
Hobart Gas Char Broiler $2,082
Dual AV modulator for Antenna $562
Antenna works & TV brackets $588
Nec 8 button handsets x 2 $178
Recorded Music System Installed $541
Orion 51 cm Televisions x 5 $203
Canon MP121DTS calculator $111
MATV connection splitters/adaptors $190
Router & Installation $777
New TV's connected $1,132
UPS $122
TAG 2268 new windows & door $4,090
TAG 1994 strongroom alterations $1,442
TAG 2168 del new freezer $81
Brochure racks $176
Geer Fonts, Glycol Tank, chiller plates $392
TAG 1695 Install time clock $96
Sattelite Dish & Decoder $1,087
Projection screen $79
Fisher & Paykel 11360X chest freezer $517
TAG 1832 Install shelving $563
Install Time clock software on PC $98
TAG 1961 new glycols syst wiring $137
TAG 1775 shelving $2,522
TAG 2268 new hot water system $2,414
Toshiba 68cm Teletext & LG VCR/DVD $879
TV antenna system for TV's in TAB $101
Bromic 4 sided bench top glass display $382
Glycol chilled beer disp syst $8,847
Dynamics PC $1,420
Convex Mirror $126
Traverse Bench seat x 2 $595
Barrier Stands, steel with rope x 4 $49
Heater - Function Room $85
Camera at front entry $504
Hotel Van QPM 697 $1,014
NEC CTV 34cm $153
Dynamics PC - Software $406
Redback UHF mic & receiver $710
Step safe stools x 4 $319
TAG 1848 - new handsfree taps $1,569
Bingo Equipment board & console $1,033
Bistro display board & controller $769
Icemaker & Bin $3,908
3 GP Radios & Ear pieces $1,313
Colour Camera for security $68
Additional camera installed $807
Upgrade digital recorder & install camera $1,771
8 x 51cm TV's $871
Keg Trolley $201

Total 50,061

Of course, the Glengala Hotel’s management are smarter with their reporting these days. Their reporting of expenses is a lot more vague.

Tomorrow I’ll tell you what happened when enquiries were made to the Victorian Commission for Gambling Regulation about how to do something about these venue owners, who are clearly claiming regular business expenses as “community benefits”.

The Labor government’s response will astound you.

In the mean time, if you want to know more about Community Benefit Statements, why not check out what your local club is claiming as a “community benefit”. Not that there’s much you’ll be able to do about it if the expenses look a bit suspect (as many of them are). But at least you’ll know you’re being ripped off, and you’ll know that Labor’s letting them rip you off after what I reveal tomorrow; cold comfort, I know.

Mildenhall's legacy: destruction of the Footscray and Sunshine community (99)

2006-08-18T06:12:00.000+10:00

Mildenhall, who will retire prior to the election, has been a community destroyer. That's his legacy to the Footscray community he is supposed to have represented all these years. This is reason number 99 for why you should put Labor last at the coming election.

Footscray lost their pool, and Mildenhall fully supported its closure. It is very sad that the Labor dominated Council in Maribrynong were basically puppets of the Labor MPs who are in power at the State level.

Maribrynong is no longer a Labor dominated council (after the last Council election), but it's now too late for them. The pool was sold before the new crew got in. Now the new crew of Councillors (no longer dominated by Labor Unity) are fighting for a new pool in Footscray, with the full support of the majority of the current Councillors!

These new Councillors would have re-opened the Footscray pool, and committed to upgrading it, but the Council no longer owns this historic asset. Labor sold it. How sad is that? In Footscray, the community's battle has basically been against Labor, at both the State and Local level. They had Labor Unity cancer in both tiers of government until the last Council election. Now that they've cut the cancer out at the Local level, it's too late. Labor did them in before the last Council election.

Interestingly, in Sunshine, which is also part of Mildenhall's electorate, their battle has also been against Labor at both the Local and State level.

It is a disgrace. And Mildenhall has been at the centre of all of this. Without his support, Footscray was behind the 8 ball. Footscray had to get rid of the Labor Councillors, before the Council would put up any sort of a fight against the State Labor government for the pool. Unfortunately, the Labor dominated Council has left them with a mess - one of Footscray's prized assets has been sold.

Make no mistake, the reason for their pain in Footscray is Labor; Labor Unity in particular. And Bruce Mildenhall has been at the centre of it all.

Bruce Mildenhall has also been a major obstacle in Sunshine's fight to save it's pool complex. Mildenhall has been arguing that the Sunshine community should be satisfied with 1/2 the water space they used to have. According to Mildenhall, the Sunshine community should be happy with that!

What sort of representation is that? You don't need a pool in Footscray, go and swim at Highpoint. You only need a tiny facility at Sunshine, and the community should be happy about that (I can't understand why everyone is so worked up, he says), everyone can swim at Highpoint! That's been Bruce's position all along. He's been one of the major obstacles to Sunshine getting its pool facility fixed properly. And his lack of support was a major factor that contributed to the closure of the Footscray pool.

People need to know that this guy is a community destroyer. That is what he should be remembered for. That's his legacay. He has been a major obstacle in both the Footscray and Sunshine community.

He has simply been there to do the bidding of the Labor party, to keep the community at bay, prevent them from getting equity, so that Labor could focus on the marginal seats.

Languiller: stacks on the mill (100)

2006-08-17T18:37:00.000+10:00

Today we continue the branch stacking theme. This is reason number 100 for why you should put Labor last at the coming election.

Telmo is just another Labor MP implicated in branch stacking and occupying a safe Labor seat. Like Seitz, Labor gets its opportunity to dump him in the pre-selection, but oh no, instead he gets the loving ALP embrace. All stackers welcomed, embraced, and guaranteed of pre-selection. The more you stack the more they love you.

Of course, Telmo is another waste of space. He does nothing, exept collude with Mildenhall (a known community destroyer) to close community pools down. Some of the worst public transport problems occur in Telmo's electorate. One of the worst Level crossings in Victoria falls in Telmo's electorate. What does he do about this. Nothing! The money's going to the marginal seats with the full blessing of Telmo Languiller. That's why Labor loves him. He does nothing for the community, just the way they want it, so they can spend the money on the marginals instead. It's the Labor Unity way.

Of course Telmo, like Seitz, has been implicated in some serious branch stacking activities. Again, the evidence that he's branch stacking is not coming from the media or the opposition; Labor's own report implicates him in a big way. In a follow up report to Cain's report, a report by Labor's Administrative Committee recommended that: "the administrative committee consider charging Telmo Languiller MP who is alleged to have provided funds for the payment of others' fees......"

Another part of this same report states: "Two witnesses......attempted to attend scheduled meetings of the Albion Greek Branch at the office of Mr Telmo Languiller but that no meeting took place".

The report goes on to say: "It is worth noting that on both dates the Albion Branch claimed to have conducted a meeting and submitted a total of 12 new applications to State Office followed by minutes and attendance records."

So what we are talking about here is forged minutes to make out that a meeting took place and forged attendance records, including forged signatures. Think about what sort of person it would take to do this kind of thing: to sit down and forge minutes and attendance records - or to direct someone to do this on your behalf. Think about it very carefully. Because these are the types of people that are representing us at the State level.

But what did Labor do about this, given this evidence and these recommendations? Again, absolutely nothing. Worse than nothing.

They had an opportunity get rid of him. But oh no. Instead, they've laid this wretched man on the unsuspecting Labor faithful again.

Labor's Love Affair with the Branch Stackers (101)

2006-08-16T06:30:00.000+10:00

There’s 101 days to go until the Victorian election and we’ve got 101 reasons why you should Put Labor Last on your ballot paper come election day.

But first, I’d like to make one thing clear; this is not a pro-Liberal Party blog; far from it. Our message is not about who you should vote for, only about who you should not vote for. In terms of who you should vote for, the great thing is you have a choice, even if you live in a safe Labor seat. There’s the Greens, Family First, there might even be the Democrats to choose from (if they still have a pulse), there’s the Liberals, and of course there’s the independents. You do have a choice.

Now to reason number 101: Labor’s love affair with the branch stackers. Why’s everybody doing it? And why is nothing being done about it?

As you saw in the previous post, Labor’s rules prohibit branch stacking and the penalties are quite severe: expulsion; suspension; and disqualification from holding any party office. In addition, according to Labor's rules anyone who’s had their membership paid for by someone else (ie. by a branch stacker) shall be deemed not to be a member.

Interesting, isn’t it? When you read these rules, you get the impression that whoever wrote them considered Branch Stacking to be a very serious offence. My, how things have changed.

Maybe the dominant Labor Unity faction just hasn’t got around to re-writing the rule book. Basically, the whole section on Branch Stacking is considered void and should be deleted, in line with standard business practice within the ALP these days. I hear they’ve drafted a new section on branch stacking, and it simply reads:

Section 5.6.1, Branch Stacking: anything goes.
Section 20.11, Penalties for Branch Stacking: No penalties, only benefits. Go to the top of the class if you’ve done it well.

I think it’s a sensible re-write, as it captures reality beautifully.

John Cain Ignored
In Labor’s own report (dated 6 December 2004) into 15 complaints brought by 3 members of Labor’s Administrative Committee, John Cain (who heard and decided on the complaints) acknowledged that Branch Stacking was rife in Victoria.

In the report, Cain states:

"Having reviewed the evidence before me, the following seems to me to be apparent:

"Organised branch stacking is going on, and growing;

"Senior Party figures - MPs, their staff, as well as enthusiastic factionally aligned ALP branch members are involved."

And who's doing the branch stacking? Amongst other people, Cain’s report identifies George Seitz:
"There is a factual issue as to whether joint meetings…..recorded as occurring in the office of George Seitz MLA with large attendances approving large numbers of new members actually took place. "

Cain goes on later to state:
"Amongst other things, joint meetings of 3 local branches with a total membership of 496 were held in a small office, which was allegedly incapable of holding the number of members required to form a quorum for each of the branches. Mr Dearicott, the Chair of the Memberships Sub-Committee attempted to attend a number of meetings of the branches in 2003, but alleges that meetings did not take pace at the nominated venue at the nominated times. "

Maybe George Seitz is a magician. He was able to hide 496 people into a tiny office and people who turned up to the meetings would swear black and blue that there was no meeting in progress. He’s got these phantom meetings happening!

And this is what Cain has to say about the phantom meetings:

"Phantom meetings and the fabrication of branch records is of great concern, whether or not directly related to branch stacking. It is fraudulent conduct, which should attract the strongest condemnation and censure. All Party members have an interest in exposing and preventing it. "

We shouldn’t just pick on George Seitz; there’s plenty of others doing it, but it seems Georgey is the Master.

So what did the Labor party do when presented with this damning report by a respected Labor Party elder and former Premier? Absolutely nothing. In fact, worse than nothing.

Seitz was due to retire prior to this year’s election, in accordance with the ALP’s requirement that members retire at 65. This is normal Party procedure, and this requirement provided the Party with as good an excuse as any to get rid of him after 20 years of stacking.

But, according to the Age (13 May 2006) Billy Shorten helped Seitz get an exemption from this requirement. “Mr Shorten chaired the meeting of administrative committee where that decision was made, under controversial circumstances.”

So not only did Labor disregard the evidence, and resist the pressure they had for something to be done about Seitz, Shorten helped get him an exemption from the requirement to retire. So now he's been pre-selected again and they’ve laid him on the Keilor community again.

In addition, the Age exposed George’s branch stacking factory in a front page article on 13 May 2006. But still nothing is done.

Seitz, of course, is not the only one doing it, but his branch stacking factory is the most grand and the most blatant.

Let's pick on someone else tomorrow.

What is Branch Stacking?

2006-08-12T18:47:00.000+10:00

The MPs that are reading this blog already know what branch stacking is - if they're from Labor Unity they've got it down to a fine art. So if that's the case, this is not worth reading. This is just a description of what they do so well, in preparation for reason 101 on Wednesday.

So what is branch stacking? To understand why branch stacking is so bad, you need to first understand how a political party typically works, or in the case of the Labor Unity dominated Labor party, how it should work.

People join the ALP and belong to a branch. For example, you might join the Footscray branch of the ALP. As a member of the ALP, providing you meet a qualifying period (ie. one year as a member) you can vote in the pre-selections. If you were a member of the Footscray Branch you could vote for the pre-selection of the Footscray candidate, along with a whole lot of other members belonging to other branches that fall within the Footscray electorate. When someone is pre-selected, this means they become the official candidate for that electorate. And for an electorate like Footscray, pre-selection basically guarantees that you will become elected to parliament, because it is one of the safest Labor seats in Victoria. So pre-selection is the holy grail in a safe Labor seat. The election is just a formality; the hard part is getting pre-selected.

To be a member of the ALP costs money based on earnings (ie. the more you earn the more you pay for your annual membership). Think about this system. You join the ALP because you want to make a difference to your community. This membership, and the money you pay for it, allows you to have your say about who gets pre-selected. It gives you that right. It also gives you the right to attend branch meetings, debate issues at these meetings, and influence policy development through this process. Effectively, your membership provides you with an influential role - sometimes a highly inlfuential role, depending on your abilities - in the whole democratic process.

Your membership also allows you to run for pre-selection yourself. You could do some lobbying and if you get enough support, you could be pre-selected; a wonderfully democratic process, in theory.

So what happens if this process becomes corrupted? What if I was a bit shifty? What if I joined the party along with a few of my hack mates? These aren’t ordinary mates. These mates have been involved in shonky business dealings in the past, with criminal records, the works. We decide to work together to get one of us elected. Let’s call this person Jalno. So we’ve all decided that we are going to get Jalno elected. We reason, once Jalno’s elected he can help a couple of us get into Council, help Jerry develop a few properties, make sure a blind eye gets turned to our illegal gambling houses, etc.

We then go around signing people up, only they don’t give a damn about the ALP. So we say, “don’t worry about it, just sign this ALP membership form. It will cost you nothing, because we pay”. We set up a couple of bingo games, under the auspices of a non-profit association, such as a child care centre, golf club, or a welfare association – something like that. So the money starts coming in, and we use the money to pay for all these disinterested people to become ALP members. If they are a bit reluctant, we sling them a few bucks and say. “there’s more where that came from, just keep your mouth shut.” Of course, all these members are signed up for the minimal amount - that's why branches that are stacked are full of so-called "members" who have all paid the minimal membership fee. The sliding scale of membership fees doesn't apply to these branches, because there aren't any real members.

Now we have a few hundred disinterested ALP members all signed up. None of them will come to an ALP meeting, because most don’t know the difference between the ALP and the Libs, many don't speak English, many are struggling just to make ends meet and are simply disinterested; perfect for our purposes. We set up a phantom branch that never meets. We fake some monthly minutes and we forge a few signatures to show that we had some "attendees" at our meeting. The minutes and signatures are a requirement of the ALP, a pain in the arse, but something you have to live with.

Because some genuine people try to join our branch, we do a deal with the state secretary (who's in on the act), and play games with their membership applications. We tell them their membership applications have been lost or arrived too late for some deadline, so they are relegated to a city branch. We do what we must to ensure that genuine members don’t expose our little branch stacking factory. Keeping the honest people out is a must.

Then pre-selection comes around and Jalno nominates. On voting day we hire a couple of buses and go around and pick up all of these disinterested ALP members. We slug them a few more bucks and promise them a nice lunch. On the bus, we take out the voting card and explain to them all how they have to vote, before they can get their free lunch and we might even sling them some more bucks. We turn up to pre-selection and woe and behold, it turns out that we easily have the numbers. The ALP membership has been decimated, so there aren’t that many authentic members there to challenge Jalno. The old genuine members are sick of the branch stacking and have given up, or joined the Greens.

I spot Huski across the room and see that he’s cottoned on to this system and has bussed in a few disinterested members of his own. He’s trying to get his incompetent daughter in, with the support of some branch stacks from a soccer club. It’s the result of a promise she's made to the soccer club, but that’s another story. But today Jalno has the numbers and is pre-selected, which guarantees he will get into parliament at the November election.

That’s basically the system we are living with, only the names have changed to protect the guilty and we’ve melded a few branch stacking examples into the one story.

Craig Otte's Prior Convictions

2006-08-07T23:37:00.000+10:00

The man that worked for the Police Minister has a colourful background indeed. Here’s what was revealed about Craig Otte’s priors at Sam Tabban’s Committal Hearing:

Craig Ian Otte, Date of Birth: 25 May 1973

3 August 1994

theft; make false documents to prejudice another;
use copy of false documents;
obtain property by deception;
burglary;
3 months on each count to be served concurrently;
suspended sentence for 24 months;
restitution: $8,700.

4 April 1995

Obtain financial advantage by deception;
case dismissed.

May 1997

Obtain financial advantage by deception (5 counts);
convicted – 12 months suspended sentence;
250 hours community service;
submit to psychological/psychiatric assessment and treatment;
compensation: $5,969.

21 January 1990

Obtain financial advantage by deception;
14 days suspended sentence for 2 years;
convicted and fined an aggregate of $750.

9 December 1999

Obtain financial advantage by deception;
fail to answer bail;
make false documents to prejudice another;
charges withdrawn.

30 May 2003

15 counts of obtaining financial advantage by deception;
sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment, sentence wholly suspended for 2 years with conviction;
fined $1000, compensation $495.

The question must be asked, why was a person with prior criminal convictions allowed to work for the Police Minister, Andre Haermeyer?

Craig Otte Reveals All

2006-08-07T23:25:00.000+10:00

The previous Brimbank Councillor, Sam Tabban, last week faced a Committal Hearing (on 31 July 2006 and 1 August 2006) regarding allegations that he bribed the current Mayor of Brimbank, Natalie Suleyman. The charges that Sam is facing resulted from a conversation he had with Natalie, which Natalie recorded after being wired up by the police. Intriguing isn’t it? It’s far more intriguing when you examine the political connections that led to this secret recording. At the time of this recording, Natalie Suleyman worked for Andre Haermeyer, the then Police Minister.

So that’s some context. But fortunately, fellow readers, there wasn’t just one secret recording in this tale of intrigue. There was another secret recording, or more correctly, another two secret recordings. Once Sam knew that he had been recorded, he was clever enough to organise for two meetings with a Mr Craig Otte, and he recorded the conversations of both of those meetings.

So who is Craig Otte? Craig Otte is an ALP man, a member of the disgraceful Labor Unity faction to be more specific. At the time that these secret conversations were recorded, Craig was working for Police Minister Andre Haermeyer. So Craig Otte was working alongside Natalie Suleyman, the current Mayor of Brimbank, in Haermeyer’s office.

Interestingly, at Sam’s Committal hearing, it was revealed that Craig Otte has a number of previous criminal convictions, dating back to 1994. It was also revealed that Haermeyer knew this. So why was Craig working for the Police Minister? Intriguing, yes?

Now, if you think the taped conversation between Sam Tabban and Natalie Suleyman was interesting, you haven’t heard anything yet. Natalie’s tape recording of Sam Tabban pales into total insignificance, when compared to the secret tape recordings that Sam Tabban made of his conversations with Craig Otte (on 25 November 2004 and on 16 December 2004).

Ironically, Craig Otte may ultimately prove to be the saviour of the Victorian ALP, as his frank and considered analysis of the ALP, proves what many of us have suspected for a long time. Craig Otte provides the proof that the Victorian ALP is a basket case, a haven for branch-stackers, a party driven by hatred, a party at war with itself, a party full of the most despicable gutter-snakes you could find.

In these secret recordings Craig Otte confirms what many of us have suspected for a long time. The Labor Party is finished in Victoria. This current thing that seeks to call itself the “Labor Party” has no resemblance to the Party it once was. It holds none of the values it once held. It is in dreadful need of an over-haul.

But let’s hear it from an insider. Let’s hear it from someone who was mixing with MPs and Councillors at the time. Let’s hear what this insider has to say about the state of the ALP and about Brimbank City Council. Let’s hear it from the man himself, Mr Craig Otte.

Craig Otte on Branch Stacking
The ALP’s own rules prohibit Branch Stacking. However, in Victoria, the ALP’s rules aren’t worth the paper they are written on. If you want to know more about what branch stacking is, the ALP’s relevant rules are replicated at the end of this article.

So the official line from the ALP is that branch stacking is prohibited and the penalties for it are quite severe. But in practice, there are plenty of MPs that wouldn’t be where they are today if it wasn’t for branch stacking. It’s what we suspected, but let’s hear from Craig Otte, the Labor insider. Here’s what he had to say about branch stacking in his conversation with Sam Tabban on 25 November 2004.

Note: the comments in brackets are my own, unless they simply state “indistinct” in which case this means the person who transcribed this from the tape couldn’t make out what was being said.

Mr Otte: It puts Andre (he is referring to the Police Minister, Andre Haermeyer) in a bad light.
Mr Tabban: Yeah
Mr Otte: Brings the ALP looking bad.
Mr Tabban: Yes. The thing is also that a lot of people is branch stacking.
Mr Otte: And he is.
Mr Tabban: You know that more than me.
Mr Otte: But he is.
Mr Tabban: Yep.
Mr Otte: But everyone branch stacks. I mean….
Mr Tabban: They seem to do it – they dobbed George (Seitz, the MP for Keilor) – they said George is the guy. I feel sorry for George.
Mr Otte: Well see that’s the thing. Hakki (Suleyman) and Robert Mammarella are the two biggest branch stackers.
Mr Tabban: Yeah. But now Hakki and Telmo (Languiller, the MP for Gorton) working together, they want more, stack more, I heard. I don’t know.
Mr Otte: I think he’s working with Hakki. I don’t think Telmo is working with Hakki.
Mr Tabban: Yeah.
Mr Otte: Telmo is working with Brendan (O’Connor, MP).
Mr Tabban: But that’s why Telmo has got Sam David (Brimbank Councillor) to work for Natalie (Current Mayor of Brimbank).
Mr Otte: Because I know Telmo is working with Brendan O’Connor.
Mr Tabban: They’re all branch stacking. You tell me who’s not? Telmo?
Mr Otte: Well Brendan has to. He’s got no members.
Mr Tabban: Yeah.
Mr Otte: Now that he’s in (indistinct) he’s got like five members of his own.
Mr Tabban: Telmo?
Mr Otte: Telmo is always branch stacking that’s how he’s an MP.
Mr Tabban: Yeah. And you got Hakki.
Mr Otte: Hakki branch stacks.

--------
Mr Otte: So branch stacking is where it’s always been. They say it’s good; it’s the biggest branch stack. He’s just making inquiries into branch stacking.
Mr Tabban: I was talking to Charlie just before (presumably, Charlie Apap, former Brimbank Councillor).
Mr Otte: Well Charlie has branch stacked with (indistinct).
Mr Tabban: Yeah (indistinct) one of them.
Mr Otte: Yeah, he did all the branch stacking for Andre.

Then in their second taped encounter (16 December 2004), Craig Otte reveals more.

Mr Tabban: You know what also – you know, I was looking about the branch stacking. Why they only lumped George (Seitz) while Hakki is worse?
Mr Otte: No, the difference is that Hakki has the meeting and George doesn’t.
Mr Tabban: Hakki has the meeting but he’s branch stacking, mate. Every Turkish comes……..
Mr Otte: But that’s not branch stacking.
Mr Tabban: But he pays for them.
Mr Otte: Not all of them.
Mr Tabban: He pays for a few.
Mr Otte: He doesn’t. He hasn’t got any money.

------------

Mr Otte: Either they pay themselves or if they’re in the seat of Maribyrnong, Bill Shorten pays.
Mr Tabban: Shorten?
Mr Otte: But only if they’re in Maribyrnong. If they’re in Gorton they pay themselves.
Mr Tabban: Why a member of Maribyrnong?
Mr Otte: Because Bill Shorten wants the seat of Maribyrnong (which he has now been pre-selected for).
Mr Tabban: Ok.
Mr Otte: ---------candidate to take that (indistinct) off Sercombe.
Mr Tabban: All right. Jesus, mate, politics.
Mr Otte: But just saying Hakki had branch stacked in the last 12 months – Hakki has brought in – we did it the other day, it’s either 36 or 38 members….
Mr Tabban: All up.
Mr Otte: ….in 12 months and George has put through 207.
Mr Tabban: 270?
Mr Otte: Big difference.
Mr Tabban: Yes.
Mr Otte: And Hakki holds the meeting, he sends out the letters…….
Mr Tabban: George sends letters.
Mr Otte: No, George has a selective list.
Mr Tabban: OK. Alright.
Mr Otte: What’s meant to happen is – like to speak – 700 branch members altogether, George is meant to send a letter out to all 700 members and he doesn’t. He’s not the only one, I mean, I’m not picking on George. It happens everywhere like that.
Mr Tabban: Yeah because Charlie is too; Andres Puig is too – all of them.
Mr Otte: Andres, exactly. In the branch that Andres used to run, there was 200 members.
Mr Tabban: Andres Puig.
Mr Otte: There was 200 members and I remember one meeting he got me to send out his invites. He got me to post them, not to do them and everything but to post them, and there was something like 30 envelopes.
Mr Tabban: Out of 200.
Mr Otte: So I mean….
Mr Tabban: Jesus Christ.
Mr Otte: …..the difference is Sam (David) - he branch stacks but he has meetings; Telmo branch stacks but he has meetings; Hakki branch stacks, he has meetings; George doesn’t have the meetings. I mean….
Mr Tabban: Telmo is South American, but Telmo – he pays, as I heard as well, like….
Mr Otte: I don’t know if he pays but he gets them paid. The members don’t pay.
Mr Tabban: The members, they don’t pay, but how he gets them paid?
Mr Otte: I think he’s got – he holds a fundraiser twice a year.
Mr Tabban: Right, from the fundraiser.
Mr Otte: George just doesn’t do anything.
Mr Tabban: Silly George.
Mr Otte: I mean you’ve been to George’s office. The room that they hold the meeting is smaller than this room.
Mr Tabban: I’ve been a few times.
Mr Otte: But he signs the book that there’s like 150 people there.

Then later, Craig discusses a conversation he had with Andre Haermeyer about the allegations brought against Sam Tabban. During this piece, Craig provides some insight into how the preselection process sometimes gets corrupted in the ALP.

Mr Otte: So we asked Andre – like, Natalie, myself and Hakki went and met Andre the next day and said, “What has he done? What are you saying to people?” because Hakki has not liked this at all. This isn’t the way you play politics in Hakki’s world.
Mr Tabban: Yes.
Mr Otte: You don’t do it like that. You stack someone out of you, you know, at the election you steal their votes. That type of stuff he’s into.
Mr Tabban: How do you steal your votes?
Mr Otte: Say you came up to vote, “Yeah, you vote like this, here, I’ll show.”
Mr Tabban: OK.
Mr Otte: So he fills up…
Mr Tabban: He helps them.
Mr Otte: “This is how you do it. Bob told me that you have to fill like this, OK, Box 3 OK.” Because most people don’t speak English.
Mr Tabban: That’s right.
Mr Otte: Sam was fantastic at it. He got like 12 of Sercombe’s votes.

Craig Otte reveals all on what the MPs think of Brimbank City Council

Mr Otte: No, I mean, the council. The Council at the moment has problems in that, for instance, I know at the moment Justin Madden has about $2 Million spare, unallocated. He’s got no more projects to give it to, and they won’t give it to Brimbank because the council isn’t supportive.
Mr Tabban: Rubbish, yeah.
Mr Otte: Like, even – ask George if Justin’s got spare money, even George knows. This is how desperate Justin is to get rid of this money. He’s got until 31 December to commit it to….
Mr Tabban: Shit, we missed on that.
Mr Otte: They won’t commit it to…..
Mr Tabban: Because of us fighting?
Mr Otte: Not just councillors but the council is in pretty bad as well. You’ve got especially poor record systems and very bad officers.
Mr Tabban: Carol?
Mr Otte: Not like they’re mean but they’re just incompetent.
Mr Tabban: Carol is the leader.
Mr Otte: I don’t know if she’s the problem.
Mr Tabban: Lynn?
Mr Otte: I’ve heard Lynn – yes.
Mr Tabban: She’s not the best.
Mr Otte: I think Carol Julian’s too busy trying to fix problems, rather than leaving the things….
-------------------------
Mr Tabban: (speaking about Brimbank Council) But easy to play it shifty in there. They’re playing it shifty.
Mr Otte: It’s too easy.
Mr Tabban: Yes.
Mr Otte: Which is why Brimbank have such a bad reputation. Like, I’ve got councillors in lots of different councils. Whittlesea is my favourite council. It is the best council. They’re all left. There’s two Labor Unities. Everyone’s left. Lara is – was Mayor, Robert’s daughter. Great Council, all the officers are very smart. Everyone likes being there which is why that works so well. Like the lack of arguments with the state government, they’re legitimate arguments. It’s like “You’ve promised this,” they’ve given this six years which is a fair amount of time. Here there’s nothing. You haven’t even got in Brimbank Council someone who looks for grant applications until, I think Marilyn said, it’s six or seven months. It was this year, it’s now part of the process that they have to check to see if there’s a current grant. But that’s still not (indistinct)…

Mr Tabban: Correct me if I’m wrong: Sam David, before he leaves overseas, I sat down with him to explain to me why he done this. He said, “Sam, I had the pressure of Telmo two days – Monday, Tuesday – and he said even Peter Batchelor got involved.
Mr Otte: I don’t know if Batchelor got – maybe Batchelor put pressure on……….
Mr Tabban: Because of the rally that I done in St Albans.
Mr Otte: I speak to Batchelor all the time.
Mr Tabban: He won’t tell you that.
Mr Otte: No, we have good conversations about (indistinct) he is of the opinion that the council is, in his words, rotten, and he’s not saying the councillors, he’s saying the council.
Mr Tabban: Rotten? Yeah, but that’s what Sam David told me. Even they had the pressure from….
Mr Otte: That’s when they put pressure on Telmo.
Mr Tabban: Telmo. He said to Telmo, and Telmo told him, “I had a call from Peter Batchelor.”
Mr Otte: That is possible.
Mr Tabban: Yes. He doesn’t want Sam Tabban at all to be….
Mr Otte: That’s what I’m trying to explain to you. Batchelor doesn’t like you.

What they did to Chris Evans
Chris Evans is a former Brimbank Councillor, who was hounded and bullied from Council. Why? Because he refused to toe the Labor Unity line. They hounded him and hounded him, bullied him until he broke, the Labor Unity way. They even came up with some trumped up charges to get him out of Council. Sound familiar? It’s what they’ll do to Miles Dymott—the new Greens’ whipping boy on Brimbank Council—if he is not careful. The signs are there already.

This is what Craig Otte had to say about this dreadful episode in the sad history of the Brimbank Council.

Mr Tabban: What can you do? That’s her (Natalie Suleyman’s) work. That’s how she works. That’s all she knows.
Mr Otte: That is how she works. She’s done that with Chris Evans.
Mr Tabban: Yeah. What happened with Chris Evans?
Mr Otte: They made him leave council, chucked him out.
Mr Tabban: On the same note, yeah, same thing? “He is no good, he did…” – very bad.
Mr Otte: So Terry and Andre (Haermeyer) and Puig did that.
Mr Tabban: Sad mate, sad.
Mr Otte: And Chris sued council, everything.
Mr Tabban: He couldn’t win, the poor bugger.
Mr Otte: Yeah, and in the end council even said he had to cover legal costs.
Mr Tabban: Poor bastard.

I love the quote by Otte “they made him leave council, chucked him out.”, and the “poor bastard’ comment. This truly reflects the rat infestation that has now infiltrated Brimbank Council. They did it to him, and according to Otte, Haermeyer was involved, and Puig, and whoever Terry is.

They broke Chris Evans. Chris was a dedicated councillor, who cared about his community, who refused to toe the line. So they destroyed him. He still has not fully recovered from their dreadful treatment of him. They make me sick to the stomach, the whole lot of them; the ones that are responsible for these despicable actions, actions that continue today, and the ones that stand by and allow them to continue. All of them, they make me sick to the stomach.

Police Minister Andre Haermeyer’s involvement in the secret tape recording that Natalie Suleyman made of Sam Tabban
In Craig Otte’s second recorded meeting with Sam Tabban (on 16 December 2004), he reveals Haermeyer’s involvement in the secret tape recording (that Natalie took of Sam Tabban).

Mr Tabban: You said to me that day that you want to talk to Andre Haemeyer.
Mr Otte: I did. I had a big argument with Andre, because Andre was the one that started this, not even Natalie.
Mr Tabban: Andre started….fucking hell. How?
Mr Otte: Natalie went to Andre and said that you’d offered her money to vote for….
Mr Tabban: But as you know, it’s not the truth.
Mr Otte: No, no, exactly. Andre goes, “well then, I’ve got Sercombe”, because he thinks that your with Sercombe (Bob Sercombe, the Federal Member for Maribyrnong). So he rang - he’s got someone in Candy Broad’s (the Minister for Local Government) office. He rang to find out if someone offered money against law and they said yes – straightaway they said yes.
Mr Tabban: He rang Candy Broad?
Mr Otte: Someone in her office – he knows someone in her office.
Mr Tabban: Someone in her office, yeah.
Mr Otte: I think maybe one of her advisers, I’m not sure.
Mr Tabban: Right.
Mr Otte: So then she rang the police and….
Mr Tabban: They rang the police in the city, not here.
Mr Otte: Yeah, in the city. Whoever he rings – Andre rang them, so I don’t know who he rings.
Mr Tabban: OK.
Mr Otte: He wouldn’t ring someone at Sunshine.
Mr Tabban: That’s right, because they told me in the city – the report happened in the city. You’re right.
Mr Otte: He rang whoever he knows in the city. He only knows Rod here I think.
Mr Tabban: Yeah, Rod Joiner, yeah.
Mr Otte: That’s how it all started, and I said but – when and what – and he goes, “He offered money,” and I said, “Look, do you want to know what really happened?” and I explained to him what happened, and he goes, “it doesn’t matter. It’s too late now, it’s already started.”
-----------------

Mr Otte: He didn’t care about you; he was thinking that this was his way of attacking Sercombe.

There’s more, but that’s the gist of it. Basically, Sam Tabban is in the predicament he is in because he has been caught in the middle of a factional Labor Party war. Do these guys play dirty or what?

Insights into the Albion Soccer Club deal
For those who are unfamiliar with politics Brimbank style, the Council voted to move the Albion Soccer Club to Cairnlea Park in early 2005. This included a commitment to funding the development of new club rooms and grounds, to the value of $650,000 from Council and $150,000 from Vic Urban.

At the time that this vote was taken by Council the Mayor, Natalie Suleyman’s brother was on the Committee of Management, and Hakki Suleyman was a previous Public Officer of the club.

Craig Otte shows that Natalie Suleyman was seeking to look after this club, to do them a special deal. This is something that many in the community have suspected and complained about, to Candy Broad the Minister for Local Government. But it seems Labor Unity looks after its own. Natalie got the Soccer Club (associated with her brother and father) a new home, including almost $1 Million in funding (from Council and State funding).

Originally it was intended that the soccer club would go to Green Gully, but there were problems with the proposed site. It had previously been a landfill site and when Council did some testing on the site, it was found to be unstable. But Council, driven by the Mayor, who was desperate to find a home for the Soccer club associated with her father and brother, would stop at nothing to get the club a special deal. In this section they are talking about the Green Gully option falling through.

Mr Otte: Because for one, I know that – committed funds to a sporting oval. Part of that is they have to do a site analysis, like that puts stuff into the ground and….
Mr Tabban: That’s (indistinct) the Turks (meaning the Albion Soccer club, which is primarily made up of Turkish members, and is the club associated with Hakki Suleyman and Mehmet Suleyman).
Mr Otte: They can’t put it there.
Mr Tabban: Why?
Mr Otte: The land is unstable.
Mr Tabban: So what’s happened to the Turks?
Mr Otte: They’ve got nowhere.
Mr Tabban: Natalie won’t be happy.
Mr Otte: No, she’s not happy.

ALP Victoria Rules

This is what Labor's own rule book says about Branch Stacking. But these rules have been thrown out the window. Does this mean the rest of the rules are also meaningless?

5.6.1 Branch Stacking
Branch stacking is conduct unacceptable to the Australian Labor party. Branch stacking is defined as the enrolling of persons to the party by offering inducement or enrolling persons for the principal purpose of influencing the outcome of ballots of members within the party. Party members individually or collectively who engage in, organise or promote branch stacking activities, including any of the following activities will be deemed to have engaged in Branch Stacking:

To pay the membership fee of a person as an inducement for that person to join the Party
To pay the membership fee of a person who is unwilling to pay their own membership fee
To pay the membership fees for any person unaware that membership has been taken out on their behalf
To pay the membership fee for a person on the precondition or understanding of that member being obliged to vote in a particular way
To pay for another’s membership in an attempt to influence the outcome of any ballot of members within the Party
To encourage any person to join the party for the express purpose of influencing the outcome of local preselection ballots or other membership ballots
To enrol, encourage or assist a member to enrol on the electoral roll at an address which is not the principal address of the member
To organise or pay for concessional rate fees for a person who is ineligible for that rate without a reasonable belief that the person was entitled to the concessional rate

To recruit members who do not live at the claimed address of enrolment

20.11 Penalties- Branch Stacking
Where members are found to have engaged in branch stacking, the penalty shall be as follows:

expulsion from the party; or
suspension from the party; and/or
disqualification from holding any party office and from endorsement for public office for a period of 5 years.

Where members are found to have had membership fees paid for in contravention of rules 5.6.1 or 5.6.2 such members shall be deemed to be no longer members and all membership rights shall be forfeit.

Countdown to the Election

2006-08-07T23:16:00.000+10:00

This blog has been created by those that are trying to save the ALP in Victoria; god knows it is in desperate need of saving. I was always a Labor supporter up until recently, up until I started to understand that this thing that has the gall to still call itself the "Labor Party", has no resemblance to the great party it once was. It is in dreadful need of a radical over-haul.

Right now the dreadful Labor Unity faction has control of the party in Victoria, and due to the despicable characters that make up this faction, the party is fast becoming a basket case.

So the message is: Put Labor Last at the 2006 State Elections in Victoria. It's the only way we will clean the party up. They need a rude awakening.

So between now and the election, we will be revealing why you should Put Labor Last at the election. Don't let them get your preferences. Give them the kick in the pants they deserve.

From Wednesday 16 August there will be 101 days until the election, and we will provide 101 reasons, one per day, as to why you should Put Labor Last at the coming election.