This article's caution is all the more understandable in the light of another electoral phenomenon, what are claimed to be last-minute rushes to get onto the electoral rolls.

Now it may be thought that recent amendments to electoral legislation, changes that are widely understood to have the effect of closing the electoral rolls at 6:00 PM on the day the writs are issued for the Federal elections, will prevent a last-minute enrolment surge such as that of 1987 and subsequent election years from occurring.

I beg to suggest this will not necessarily be so.

A series of four posts titled "The Method in the Proposed Referendum Madness" to the topic "Vote against four year Federal Parliamentary terms", commencing with this link: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=881#15317 , and continuing further down the thread, explain why this seeming early closure of the rolls may be ineffective.

Returning to the matter of the enrolment surge of July 1987, Submission 161 on the list at http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/em/elect04/subs.htm seems to make a case for the enrolment surge that was claimed to have occurred AFTER the announcement of the 1987 Federal elections actually having been in the enrolment accountancy BEFORE that announcement. If that is true, then it is a BIG WORRY, because that might indicate some degree of manipulation as to the emplacement of names on rolls. Electoral fraud based upon carefully emplaced names is virtually undetectable, should it be occurring.

Submission 161 establishes a discrepancy in the enrolment accountancy for the 1987 roll-close of 204,880 enrolments Australia-wide. Would that have been enough to have made the marginals go counter-trend if it represented fraudulent vote claims on that occasion?

Crikey identifies Bennelong as a critical marginal seat. See: http://www.crikey.com.au/2007-Election/The-Most-Critical-Seat.html . Does the scenario in this link: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=445#8741 to a post to the topic "Bennelong: John Howard vs Maxine McKew" seem a likely prospect?

The feeling is real, the outcome assured, want to bet it is not?
We need to review a few things even when he was unbeatable John Howard was not liked.
If you understand just how out of touch the ALP was for a time you will see we made Howard unbeatable.
Simon Crean , tell if you have an understanding of politics how he could ever lead us?
And do you remember the day Crean put his spite filled support behind his mate Latham?
That day robbed the party of a leader with a real chance then of winning.
In truth if you do understand the subject would Kim Beasley have led us so badly?lost the senate? no way!
Rudd say what you will is not letting Howard wedge the ALP.
He is assured of government, some Medea are trying to hide the fact they already know Howard left it too late to go, and lefts his imprint on his party so no other leader is ready for the job.
We should never forget this win is as much a protest about Howard school yard gang style government as an endorsement of the ALP.
The election must follow Howard's flaunting of his mate loony tunes Bush ASAP.