Bob Gosford writes: Re. “CLP sticks by Leo Abbott despite DVO details” (Tuesday, item 10). Paragraph three of this article states that Mr Leo Abbott was subject to “a good behaviour bond for a period of two years”. Crikey now understands that this information is incorrect and that in fact the period of the good behaviour bond that the Court imposed on Mr Leo Abbott was in fact nine months.

The election:

Misha Ketchell writes: Re. “Keane’s Talking Points: cue the ‘late swing’ headlines” (Campaign Crikey morning edition: Day 33, item 1). Bernard Keane is barking up the wrong tree with his repeated demand that disaffected voters look in the mirror. Sure it’s what political insiders grumble — that if they did the things they really wanted to do they’d be voted out, they’d lose the news cycle, polling is against them, punters are against them, yadayada. But Keane seems to forget that politicians are supposed to be able to persuade.

In recent times Howard/Costello won us over to an unpopular GST. And before that the Hawke/Keating governments brought in a raft of significant economic reforms in the face of stiff opposition. Just putting the spotlight back on the voters and saying they need to change their what’s-in-it-for-me attitudes lets the current crop of so-called leaders off way too lightly.

Andrew Haughton writes: After five weeks of Gillard and Abbott playing dodgem cars with the electorate en route to the Lodge, Bob Brown presents a refreshingly straightforward road map of where he wants Australia to go. Maybe that’s why the voters are responding favourably to the Greens.

Stimulus, Labor and the election:

Garren Cronin writes: Re. “Quiggin: why I’m standing up for Labor’s stimulus package” (yesterday, item 1). With reference to the “Open Letter” signed by a bunch of academics, claiming not to have a political agenda, I accept their argument that fiscal stimulus was helpful in avoiding a protracted downturn, but that’s it.

The ALP stimulus schemes did not promote productivity for the Australian economy and were largely one off cash injections. I mean giving many in the population $900, simply translated into a new TV or trip to the TAB … hardly responsible economic management.

How is that a good use of tax payer’s funds?

Rugby league and Labor:

A spokeswoman for Kate Ellis, the Federal Minister for Sport, writes: Re. “Crikey Sports: love rugby league? Then vote Liberal” (Campaign Crikey morning edition: Day 32, item 5). Federal Labor has invested and committed more than $42 million in Rugby League facilities since forming government in 2007, including:

  • $10 million to complete Energy Australia Stadium in Newcastle
  • $8 million to upgrade Campbelltown Stadium
  • $5 million for the Penrith Valley Sports Hub at Penrith Stadium
  • $3 million Leichhardt Oval and
  • $10.4 million for a new Rugby League Headquarters Building (October 2009)

On top of this the Federal Labor Government has also invested:

  • Around $4 million in various Rugby League development programs (Indigenous Sport Program Sport Leadership Grants for Women AIS Scholarship Program Allocation)

The NT News:

Julian Ricci, Editor of the Northern Territory News, writes: Re. “Tips and rumours” (yesterday, item 6). Crikey published:

“No comment on Bolt’s blog. Andrew Bolt now has a weekly column in the NT News. It used to allow blog comments in response to his articles, but the comments function has just recently been removed. I know the paper received some complaints about carrying his column, but he usually encourages comments. All the paper’s other opinion pieces allow comments, but not his. Is there something behind this?”

Who was it who once said “The complete lack of evidence is the surest sign that the conspiracy is working”? When I clicked on the link Crikey itself provided in your anonymous complainer’s comment yesterday, lo and behold, Andrew Bolt’s latest column was there, with the comment facility duly enabled.

Come back, anonymous complainer, and try again. We want your PI

Climate change:

Ken Lambert writes: Re. “Climate change: one-on-one with the elephant in the room” (yesterday, item 10). Ellen Sandell, general manager of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition, and her kiddies can sleep soundly. If Australia turned off all CO2 and waste heat producing energy tonight, it would make a difference of 0.02degC in global temperatures in 2050 — while we survivors all froze in the dark in bunny skins for 40 years.

Evidence of warming is not evidence of AGW. The issue has always been about quantifying the CO2GHG effects and all the related effects.

I would not be too worried about catastrophe Amanda – CO2GHG effect is logarithmic and radiative cooling is exponential. The ocean heat content and energy budget imbalances simply point to there being a flattening of the warming, which puts in doubt the claimed magnitude of the CO2GHG effect.

Temperature measurement is under review — particularly ocean temperature and heat content data is increasingly incoherent and contradictory. USA land temperatures are probably distorted and exaggerated by the waste heat effects. Climategate has put beyond doubt the manipulation by key advocacy scientists to s-x-up the AGW story by stacking committees and smothering dissenting scientific views in learned journals.

I notice than Tim Flannery has gone quiet since the drought has broken and there is more water in inland Australia than there has been for 20 years. Maybe global warming brings Australia more rain — how good is that?

The Rudd kiddie was riding for a fall, but even I did not anticipate the ruthlessness with which the Julia was induced into pulling the trigger. At least we will be spared the Rudd ETS — a potential plaything of finance spivs here and abroad.

Anyone heard from Ms Wong lately? Either way the Labor Party has wimped the “greatest moral challenge of our age” because they don’t really believe anymore after the IPCC circus in Copenhagen and the Climategate exposure of advocacy science posing great uncertainty as gospel truth.

YouTube and politics:

Mark Phillips, ACTU Media Co-ordinator, writes:  Re. “Let’s fight the copyright agaaain” “Media briefs: no drugs for Hughesy … Copyright Timewarp … News Corp loves the Republicans … ” (yesterday, item 20). It’s true that YouTube have been vigilant in policing videos from all sides of politics for copyright and for “offensiveness”.

The ACTU was also a victim last week, when our “Budgie Smuggler” video was abruptly taken offline after some complaints. Suspecting the complaints had been generated by Liberal supporters more worried about any public discussion of WorkChoices and industrial relations than by any “offensiveness”, we appealed and YouTube agreed that Australians should be allowed to see the video.

It’s still there for all to see here.

The Democrats:

David Havyatt writes: Re. David Thackrah (yesterday, comments) who wrote: “the media experience for this Laberal election has seen information about minor parties censored.” It might be worthy to note that “not reported” is not the same as “censored”. Would anyone have noticed the content of ten releases in the last three weeks?

Charlie Pickering:

Craig Cadby writes: Re. “Daily Proposition: read about the Pickerings’ practical joke war” (yesterday, item 19). In the interests of credible journalism I think it is inaccurate and misleading to refer to Charlie Pickering as a comedian.