The article "Dictatorial Conduct" by myself, just published today on Online Opinion, may be of interest.

To quote from the teaser on the Online Opinion home page: "Premier Peter Beattie's dictatorial conduct about local council amalgamations is rivaled only by that of John Howard."

The article is at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=6261
The forum discussion is at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=6261

The article "Dictatorial Conduct" published on OLO is indeed of interest. It provides further evidence of the cynical political stuntsmanship of which you rightly complain.

It seems as if there may be some degree of misunderstanding of the constitutional position with respect to local government, as evidenced by westernred's statement in that article's thread that "local government is in the constitution". No it's not, if by that s/he means the Commonwealth Constitution. The content of Section 119, and the (rejected) 1988 proposal for alteration is set out below.

"119. The Commonwealth shall protect every State against invasion and, on the application of the Executive Government of the State, against domestic violence."

Constitution Alteration (Local Government) 1988.

2. The Constitution is altered by inserting after section 119 the following section:

Local Government

"119A. Each State shall provide for the establishment and continuance of a system of local government, with local government bodies elected in accordance with the laws of the State and empowered to administer, and to make by-laws for, their respective areas in accordance with the laws of the State."

The rights and wrongs of Beattie's dictatorial conduct are a distraction. It's really all about the mechanical aspects of electoral roll integrity, closure of the rolls on the day of issue of the writs, usurpation of roll-keeping responsibility, and the capability (or otherwise) of centralized roll-keeping to meet the requirements of electoral legislation and hold up under scrutiny at roll close.

Pegasus in the "Dictatorial Conduct" thread states: "Ludwig asks what government we can support. To me, none of the current ones and none being proposed by any Oppositions of Labor or Coalition branding." Never a truer word spoken. Pegasus concludes by observing that our present experience of democracy is in fact one of oligarchy. I would remind readers that in law, our governance is conducted under a mon-archy, and that perhaps it is time that, within the constraints of the law of the Constitution, that legal fact be unmistakeably demonstrated across this indissoluble Federal Commonwealth.