>> Apparently the Thomson issues were known before he was preselected, so why wasn't he vetted out? You don't need proof of criminality to decide that someone's history represents too great a risk. There's room for an internal inquiry into party structures here at the very least. <<

Probably for the same reasons most parties don't worry excessively about their candidates - as long as they are reasonable and meet the basic requirement vis a vis criminal record, they are accepted for preselection.

As, stated, none of this Sturm und Drang would've even occurred had Labor had a clear majority. Perhaps, the Libs could learn from this lesson as well, prior to the next election - they are far from shiny clean either.

A good start for the Libs would be to find a leader who has actual policies instead of a succession of back-flips. And if they do win the next election, they might be wise to thoroughly vet their candidates - a Labor in opposition will be eager to even the score.

Just sayin'.

My comment on this article by Graham is..... 'please go early, Ms Gillard’ and we will then see the carnage that will occur whether early or not or even full term, the result will be the same.
Beattie on board in whatever capacity will not save her. Nothing will.

She is universally disliked and enjoys no respect, not even in her own party.

Gillard is everything this country does not need. She is compromised beyond belief and is currently 'stacking' her front bench with compromised politicians of like mind; she has shown by her actions that she has extremely poor judgement in so many ways, too many to mention; she has lied to the Australian public and her subsequent efforts to overcome these mistakes and the Thompson matter as well, have highlighted her incompetence as did the insulation fiasco, education revolution and the mining tax, all showing her bumbling inputs.

She appears to have a total regard only for her own skills, the master of the “I” pronoun.
When everything is based on the “I”, then we all know where to 'point the bone'.

Last weekend we saw articles on the subject in the newspapers, but one in particlar deserves a comment. It was a West Australian writer, Peter van Onselen, pumping for an eventual replacement of Gillard by Stephen Smith, coincidentally also from Western Australia, a colourless, indecisive politician who has demonstrated in his own little bailiwick, Defence, that he has little knowledge of how to run a department, let alone a country. He is uninspiring and a poor leader and far from being a respected motivator.

Motivation. That is what is needed right now in our apathetic, leaderless, sycophantic US appendage; a sense of independence in foreign policy, pride in our achievements (other than the sporting field), a confidence that we are heading in the right direction and respect and tolerance for all peoples, whoever they are, whatever they think.
The divisive policies expounded by our current politicians are the very last thing we need.

Abbott or Gillard? Labor or the Coalition?

What a choice

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12542#216671

Ammonite, do you live in the land of OZ or some other fairy tale land?

Both major mistake parties have an excellent record of thoroughly vetting candidates for a "safe" seat & only allowing the ocasional "honest" local candidate into marginal seats.

How else do you think Barnaby Joyce got into the senate? Senior national party leadership never in their wildest dreams thought his original senate slot was winable, otherwise they would have selected a dishonest candidate.

Good article but it is already too late for Juliar Dillard to give it a try, if she had done this on day one maybe it could have worked.

But the Beattie method is already well understood by Queenslanders as a scapegoat, white wash solution.

The only way a bad government can win an election is if the opposing side looks worse. NSW and QLD are good examples of that.

Given that many Labor candidates come from the unions, it might also pay for those organisations to assess some of their internal policies and regulations including instant dismissal should funds be misappropriated.

One of the gripes with unions is their too close ties with the ALP and lack of care as regards their membership base. The ALP has also finding out the hard way what happens when you ignore the rank and file.

It would seem political suicide to take a high risk candidate like Thomson if all the facts were known - visiting prostitutes is not in itself a crime only misappropriating funds for that purpose.

Gillard is not 'condoning' the alleged behaviour she is avoiding a by-election. It may also go against the PM should she sack an MP based on unsubstantiated allegations no matter how bad it looks. Best to wait for the results of the investigation and take action. Our system of justice rests on a presumption of innocence not trials by media.

Pelican

>> Our system of justice rests on a presumption of innocence not trials by media. <<

I begin to wonder.

You may find the following article of interest at The Conversation:

"Over the last five years, Australian politics has undergone a quiet revolution. It has killed off political parties with long-term ideology and platforms, and replaced them with politicians who are market-driven, short-term in focus, and chase after electoral success at any cost

The revolution has swept all before it to change the way politics is not only seen but consumed."

http://theconversation.edu.au/democracy-is-dead-long-live-political-marketing-2666

We have been reduced to consumers - which explains the pre-judgement and type of campaigning we see from the current opposition. The sad fact is I don't expect Labor to be any more effective than the Libs in Opposition.

Most people are missing the point about Thompson and brothelgate.

One old-time politician (Senior moment... I forget his name)who was on TV with Beattie when Beattie pushed the spin about 'assumptions of innocence', put his finger on the issue.

He rejected outright any notions about criminality and stated the issue in the public mind is not about criminality but is about the behaviour.

The part of the electorate most angry and asking the questions about the behaviour are those once most supportive of Gillard. Woman and particularly young women.

Anacdotal evidence seems to support this. Last night Q and A a young women asked what type of message did Gillard send when her response was to defend Thompson in the face of the allegations of brothel visiting?

The answers from the socialist love-in writers panel mirrored the government spin on the aspect of criminality. The lefties just didn't get it, none addressed the young woman's question on the behaviour.

Just have a chat with the next young woman you talk to. Most seem to think Thompson, from my observations, is getting a 'free ride' or more specifically that the standards applied to him are different from the standards that are applied in the wider community. Especially those pertaining to respect for women.

That group is a crucial segment of Gillard's electoral support and they get it. Gillard's popularity will continue to plummet ... still further... as will the ALP'S.

The only question in my mind is; Who is left for them to ostracise?