Setting the Record Straight on Pauline Hanson 9/12/2007

Once again the vultures are out complaining that Pauline Hanson will get electoral funding for her Senate campaign. Ellen Whinnett, writing in the Herald Sun on November 26  calls her a "serial loser", neglecting to mention all Liberal candidates in safe Labor seats, or Labor candidates in safe Liberal seats, must  also by definition be "serial losers".

This follows a Labor submission to the Parliamentary Inquiry into conduct of the 2004 Federal Election that   alleged  "blatant profiteering for personal benefit" on the part of  Pauline Hanson . But  in a safe Labor seat where say 65% vote ALP, the ALP gets about $240,000 in funding  after having spent, (unless they had gold-plated how-to-votes)  probably no more than  $30,000, a profit  of $210,000.

Furthermore if we are talking about taxpayers' money going to undeserving people, what about  our gaggle of ex-prime ministers, most of whom were rejected by the Australian public, still spongeing  off the public  with a stipend, a free office, free staff and free transport, even though they are wealthy in their own right, mostly due to the prestige. influence and lucrative contacts they inherited from their position?

It is significant that the Labor plan to increase the threshold to 5% would still be low enough to not significantly disadvantage The Greens, and guess what party  The Greens direct their preferences to.

Whatever you may think of Pauline Hanson and her reasons for standing, she is just as much entitled under the AEC rules to the funding as anyone else, though now Labor have got control of this  country via a compliant media and millions of dollars from their capitve union members and business mates, who will be paid off in kind, no doubt they will rig the election rules to change this.

The media vultures also neglect to mention that the Queensland Government still owe Pauline Hanson $502,000 which they never paid back after the successful appeal  against her jail sentence established that  the original de-registration of the party which forced her to repay  the electoral funding  was invalid, not to  mention the compensation they owe her for her time in jail.

Labor has a history of changing electoral rules to its own advantage. They introduced compulsory voting in NSW local government elections which always benefits Labor, they did away with the requirement for electors only to vote at a particular booth so as  to allow multiple voting, and they changed the Electoral Act in Queensland so people charged with electoral fraud could be charged under the Criminal Code instead of the Electoral Act, specifically to  "get" Pauline Hanson with a tougher sentence that would make her ineligible to stand for Parliament.

If Kevin-the-Shredder's regime can bend the electoral rules to selectively remove political opponents, what else do they intend to do to  cement themselves in power?

Brendan Nelson are you listening?

Supporters of a fair go  everywhere should protest against this serious assault on Australian democracy.