DOCSLIB.ORG

My Wikileaks Party Inquiry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
My Wikileaks Party Inquiry My WikiLeaks Party Inquiry by Gary Lord (@Jaraparilla) A full independent review of what really happened to The Wikileaks Party. “I am not a politician.” - Julian Assange. Table of Contents Mandate................................................................................................................................................2 Terms of Reference...............................................................................................................................2 Objectives.............................................................................................................................................2 Scope....................................................................................................................................................2 Methodology.........................................................................................................................................3 Assumptions.........................................................................................................................................3 Review & Approval..............................................................................................................................3 About the Author..................................................................................................................................4 Historical Background..........................................................................................................................5 Party Foundations............................................................................................................................5 The Schism......................................................................................................................................5 The Preferences Debacle.................................................................................................................6 The Walkout...................................................................................................................................10 The Fallout.....................................................................................................................................12 Election Results.............................................................................................................................12 Post-election Activity.....................................................................................................................12 Blogging....................................................................................................................................12 Syria Trip...................................................................................................................................12 Pro-Russian Propaganda...........................................................................................................14 The WLP Review/Inquiry.........................................................................................................14 Abuse Of WikiLeaks Supporters...............................................................................................15 WA Revote................................................................................................................................16 Findings..............................................................................................................................................16 The NSW “Administrative Error”.................................................................................................16 WA Preferences..............................................................................................................................17 Blaming The Greens......................................................................................................................17 Blaming Julian...............................................................................................................................17 Mitigating Factors.....................................................................................................................18 Summary Of Findings...............................................................................................................18 Recommendations..............................................................................................................................19 Sources...............................................................................................................................................20 Mandate This inquiry is mandated by the need to be transparent and accountable to all disaffected WikiLeaks supporters around the globe, including current and former WikiLeaks Party members, who have a right to know what really happened to the WikiLeaks Party at the Australian 2013 federal election. This inquiry is mandated by the WikiLeaks Party's own failure to deliver a meaningful promised inquiry into their calamitous “errors” in the September 2013 election, their continued damage of the WikiLeaks “brand”, and their failure to uphold their own stated values of transparency, accountability and justice. This inquiry is mandated by the dire state of our planet and the urgent need for genuine change to our political, business and social structures. Anyone associated with WikiLeaks should be setting an example, not playing cynical power games. Terms of Reference Unlike the six embarrassing pages of garbage (including mis-titled cover page and irrelevant email addendum) spewed up by WLP after five months, this inquiry is not limited by deliberately arbitrary Terms of Reference limitations. Instead it provides a comprehensive, independent, public review of the WikiLeaks Party (“WLP”), including: • the creation of the party and the lead-up to the 2013 Federal Election, where the allocation of preferences proved a critical point of failure, • post-election responses and further activity of WikiLeaks Party members, • the current state of the party, • outlook for the future of the Wikileaks Party. Objectives • To hold the WikiLeaks Party to its own professed standards of transparency and accountability, as stated in its Constitution. • To examine communications between WLP decision-makers leading up to and following the 2013 Australian federal election. • To expose the truth behind unpopular WLP preferencing decisions in NSW and WA, including the unsubstantiated claim of an “administrative error” in NSW. • To examine how WLP staff have behaved before, during and since the election, and how this has affected the reputations of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange. • To recommend future changes. Scope This inquiry adopts as broad a scope as is required to get to the truth about the WikiLeaks Party. There are no timeframe constraints or other limitations. The scope of this inquiry is only limited by WLP's continued failure to explain its own actions, and the author’s inability to get straight answers from anyone still associated with WLP, including several who seem to have left the party but remain silent on their involvement. The author has made repeated unsuccessful approaches for information to WikiLeaks Party directly, and the following people in particular: • John Shipton • Cassie Findlay • Greg Barns • Kellie Tranter • Gail Malone • Omar Todd Methodology This review is presented in the format of a formal audit for no particular reason other than to make a mockery of the WikiLeaks Party's own decision to adopt such pseudo-professional voodoo to whitewash their actions. The author has examined all available public data, including: • Written statements of resignation from ex National Council members Leslie Cannold, Dr Dan Matthews, Luke Pearson, Sam Castro and Kaz Cochrane, plus volunteers like David Haidon and Sean Bedlam, • Analysis from interested activists such as @MarthaGroup (now @Hazelpress), • Website content, media interviews and WLP press releases, • Twitter and Facebook commentary. • SMS responses from Sam Castro to questions others refused to answer. Where the author has relied on verbal information or personal experience, this is clearly stated. See the About The Author section below for background. See the Sources section below for links to original documents. Assumptions Given the reticence of WLP staff to publicly justify their actions, answer simple questions, or respond to valid criticism, the author has been forced to make assumptions about their reasons for maintaining silence. Of course people have a right to remain silent, but when they scape-goat others without explaining their own actions, and where circumstantial evidence is compelling, assumptions unfortunately become inevitable. Readers are of course welcome to draw their own conclusions. Review & Approval This independent inquiry will be reviewed and approved (or not) by the general public. Corrections to factual errors will happily be made if any mistakes are identified and proven. This inquiry is intended as a positive contribution to further public discussion and decision-making. Anyone disagreeing with any of the facts presented in this review is welcome to leave a public comment below (preferably) or contact the author: • Gary Lord • [email protected] • @Jaraparilla About the Author • The Australian author of this review is a long-time vocal WikiLeaks supporter who since 2010 has helped organise many local and national demonstrations in support of WikiLeaks and Julian Assange's right to freedom. His tweets
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Which Political Parties Are Standing up for Animals?
    Which political parties are standing up for animals? Has a formal animal Supports Independent Supports end to welfare policy? Office of Animal Welfare? live export? Australian Labor Party (ALP) YES YES1 NO Coalition (Liberal Party & National Party) NO2 NO NO The Australian Greens YES YES YES Animal Justice Party (AJP) YES YES YES Australian Sex Party YES YES YES Pirate Party Australia YES YES NO3 Derryn Hinch’s Justice Party YES No policy YES Sustainable Australia YES No policy YES Australian Democrats YES No policy No policy 1Labor recently announced it would establish an Independent Office of Animal Welfare if elected, however its structure is still unclear. Benefits for animals would depend on how the policy was executed and whether the Office is independent of the Department of Agriculture in its operations and decision-making.. Nick Xenophon Team (NXT) NO No policy NO4 2The Coalition has no formal animal welfare policy, but since first publication of this table they have announced a plan to ban the sale of new cosmetics tested on animals. Australian Independents Party NO No policy No policy 3Pirate Party Australia policy is to “Enact a package of reforms to transform and improve the live exports industry”, including “Provid[ing] assistance for willing live animal exporters to shift to chilled/frozen meat exports.” Family First NO5 No policy No policy 4Nick Xenophon Team’s policy on live export is ‘It is important that strict controls are placed on live animal exports to ensure animals are treated in accordance with Australian animal welfare standards. However, our preference is to have Democratic Labour Party (DLP) NO No policy No policy Australian processing and the exporting of chilled meat.’ 5Family First’s Senator Bob Day’s position policy on ‘Animal Protection’ supports Senator Chris Back’s Federal ‘ag-gag’ Bill, which could result in fines or imprisonment for animal advocates who publish in-depth evidence of animal cruelty The WikiLeaks Party NO No policy No policy from factory farms.
    [Show full text]
  • The Struggle for the Senate's Centre Michelle Grattan
    The Power of Small Voices: The Struggle for the Senate's Centre Michelle Grattan I am delighted to be here in Launceston. Many, many years ago, back in 1975, I spent a week here at the end of the Bass by-election. Talk about history! Federal Labor's defeat in that by-election was a moment of drama and a look into the future. One of the most helpful people I encountered was The Examiner's Michael Courtney. He was a font of knowledge and very generous with it; I recall an informative and entertaining dinner Laurie Oakes and I had at his home that week. John West, to whose memory this lecture is dedicated, was of course one of the moving spirits in the founding of The Examiner ; later he moved to Sydney to edit the Sydney Morning Herald . Among many other subjects, federalism and federation, then many years off, were among his interests and the subject of his writings. In the course of those writings he had some observations on the American Senate. He noted that the structure of that Senate saw a remarkable spirit of concession where – in terms of its equal representation of states – ''the power of the weakest is equal with the strongest''. He wrote: The pride of numerical authority long resisted a compromise, which seemed to give away the natural force of majorities, and which made a senator chosen in the desert equal to one appointed by the empire state; yet it is not difficult to perceive the immense value of this arrangement as a moderating influence.
    [Show full text]
  • 23. Explaining the Results
    23. Explaining the Results Antony Green Labor came to office in 2007 with its strongest hold on government in the nation’s history—it was, for the first time, in office nationally and in every state and territory. Six years later Labor left national office with its lowest first preference vote in a century. For only the third time since the First World War, a governing party failed to win a third term in office. From a clean sweep of governments in 2007, by mid-2014 Labor’s last bastions were minority governments in South Australia and the Australian Capital Territory.1 Based on the national two-party-preferred vote, Labor’s 2013 result was less disastrous than previous post-war lows in 1966, 1975, 1977 and 1996. Labor also bettered those four elections on the proportion of House seats won. The two-party-preferred swing of 3.6 percentage points was also small for a change of government election, equal to the swing that defeated the Fraser Government in 1983 but smaller than those suffered by Whitlam in 1975, Keating in 1996 and Howard in 2007. Even over two elections from 2007 to 2013, the two-party- preferred swing of 6.2 percentage points was below that suffered by Labor previously over two elections (1961–66 and 1972–75), and smaller than the swing against the Coalition between 1977 and 1983. By the measure of first preference vote share, the 2013 election was a dreadful result for Labor, its lowest vote share since 1904.2 Labor’s vote share slid from 43.4 per cent in 2007 to 38.0 per cent in 2010 and 33.4 per cent in 2013.
    [Show full text]
  • Donor to Political Party Return Form
    Donor to Political Party Disclosure Return – Individuals FINANCIAL YEAR 2014–15 The due date for lodging this return is 17 November 2015 Completing the Return: • This return is to be completed by a person who made a gift to a registered political party (or a State branch), or to another person or organisation with the intention of benefiting a registered political party. • This return is to be completed with reference to the Financial Disclosure Guide for Donors to Political Parties. • Further information is available at www.aec.gov.au. • This return will be available for public inspection from Monday 1 February 2016 at www.aec.gov.au. • Any supporting documentation included with this return may be treated as part of a public disclosure and displayed on the AEC website. • The information on this return is collected under the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918. NOTE: This form is for the use of individuals only. Please use the form Political Party Disclosure Return- Organisations if you are completing a return for an organisation. Details of person that made the donation Name Postal address Suburb/Town State Postcode Telephone number ( ) Fax number ( ) Email address Certification I certify that the information contained in this return and its attachments is true and complete to the best of my knowledge information and belief. I understand that giving false or misleading information is a serious offence. Signature Date Enquiries and returns Funding and Disclosure Phone: 02 6271 4552 should be addressed to: Australian Electoral Commission Fax: 02 6293 7655 PO Box 6172 Email: [email protected] Kingston ACT 2604 Office use only Date received DAR_1_indiv.
    [Show full text]
  • The Caretaker Election
    26. The Results and the Pendulum Malcolm Mackerras The two most interesting features of the 2010 election were that it was close and it was an early election. Since early elections are two-a-penny in our system, I shall deal with the closeness of the election first. The early nature of the election does, however, deserve consideration because it was early on two counts. These are considered below. Of our 43 general elections so far, this was the only one both to be close and to be an early election. Table 26.1 Months of General Elections for the Australian House of Representatives, 1901–2010 Month Number Years March 5 1901,1983, 1990, 1993, 1996 April 2 1910, 1951 May 4 1913, 1917, 1954, 1974 July 1 1987 August 2 1943, 2010 September 4 1914, 1934, 1940, 1946 October 6 1929, 1937, 1969, 1980, 1998, 2004 November 7 1925, 1928, 1958, 1963, 1966, 2001, 2007 December 12 1903, 1906, 1919, 1922, 1931, 1949, 1955, 1961, 1972, 1975, 1977, 1984 Total 43 The Close Election In the immediate aftermath of polling day, several commentators described this as the closest election in Australian federal history. While I can see why people would say that, I describe it differently. As far as I am concerned, there have been 43 general elections for our House of Representatives of which four can reasonably be described as having been close. They are the House of Representatives plus half-Senate elections held on 31 May 1913, 21 September 1940, 9 December 1961 and 21 August 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Week Six Semester Two 2013
    week six semester two 2013 honi soit honi A critique of right- wing commentary p 7 Sex work and social media p 10 First Person: Group Sex p 12 Revue Reviews: Education and Arts p 16 DISCONTENTS The art of listening COKE IN THE 4 BUBBLERS As easy it is to become apathetic about rience that we may never be unlucky individual threads are loathe to be sev- the current state of Australian politics enough to have scarred onto our bodies ered. The warmest fabrics are built from Hannah Ryan and give up altogether, your vote will and minds, but that we may be trusted the collaboration, peaceful coexistence help lessen the possibility of an Abbott- enough to share. If you are trusted with and reciprocity of the threads that com- MALE POLITICIANS’ led government. Use it wisely. But of them, treat the fragments kindly. Some- prise it. Of we, the threads, that hold course, you’ve heard this all before, so times they flicker with structural oppres- the fragile balance of power in our 8 DAUGHTERS I’ll leave it here. Don’t let him win. sion, institutionalised discrimination, daily weaves, that collectively dictate the Matilda Surtees Now, onto more practical matters. and daily struggle. structural integrity of the fabric. Being wrong can be a useful experi- Ask questions. Considerate, relevant And lessons learnt in fraying threads THE JOB ence. When we are wrong, we learn. questions. Listen for the answers that are not fast forgotten. 11 But only if we listen. Last week, a par- explain better than wilful ignorance, Listen for knowledge and understand- INTERVIEW ticularly saddening Facebook argument bigotry, projected insecurities and the ing, empathise with grief, and ask for Anonymous I was lurking got me thinking.
    [Show full text]
  • Optional Preferential Voting for the Australian Senate
    ELECTORAL REGULATION RESEARCH NETWORK/DEMOCRATIC AUDIT OF AUSTRALIA JOINT WORKING PAPER SERIES OPTIONAL PREFERENTIAL VOTING FOR THE AUSTRALIAN SENATE Michael Maley (Associate, Centre For Democratic Institutions, Australian National University) WORKING PAPER NO. 16 (NOVEMBER 2013) 1 Introduction This paper explores the possible use of optional preferential voting (OPV) as a way of dealing with concerns which have been crystallised at the 2013 Australian federal election about the operation of some aspects of the Senate electoral system. Its main emphasis is on the extent to which full preferential voting no longer enables voters to express their preferences truthfully, and the role which OPV could play in correcting this.1 In a number of respects, the election was remarkable. • The 40 vacancies were contested by a record number of candidates, 529. • The percentage of votes polled by parties already represented in the Parliament dropped significantly from 2010. • In five out of the six States, a candidate was elected from a party which had never previously been represented in the federal Parliament. • For the first time ever, the seats in one State, South Australia, were divided between five different parties. • In Victoria, a minor party candidate was elected after having polled only 0.5% of the first preference votes cast in the State. • In Western Australia, a partial recount of ballot papers was ordered, and in the aftermath of its conduct it was revealed by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) that some 1,375 ballot papers “all of which had been verified during the initial WA Senate count … could not be located, rechecked or verified in the recount process”.
    [Show full text]
  • JSCEM Submission K Bonham
    Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters: Inquiry into and report on all aspects of the conduct of the 2013 Federal Election and matters related thereto. by Dr Kevin Bonham, submitted 10 April 2014 Summary This submission concerns the system for voting in Senate elections. Following the 2013 Australian federal elections, the existing Senate system of group ticket voting is argued to be broken on account of the following problems: * Candidates being elected through methods other than genuine voter intention from very low primary votes. * Election outcomes depending on irrelevant events involving uncompetitive parties early in preference distributions. * The frequent appearance of perverse outcomes in which a party would have been more successful had it at some stage had fewer votes. * Oversized ballot papers, contributing to confusion between similarly-named parties. * Absurd preference deals and strategies, resulting in parties assigning their preferences to parties their supporters would be expected to oppose. * The greatly increased risk of close results that are then more prone to being voided as a result of mistakes by electoral authorities. This submission recommends reform of the Senate system. The main proposed reform recommended is the replacement of Group Ticket Voting with a system in which a voter can choose to: * vote above the line for one or more parties, with preferences distributed to those parties and no other; or * vote below the line with preferences to at least a prescribed minimum number of candidates
    [Show full text]
  • Donor to Political Party Disclosure Lndividuals
    Donor to Political Party Disclosure AEC Return - lndividuals FINANCIAL YEAR 2014-15 The due date for lodging this return is 17 November 2015 Gompleting the Return: o This return is to be completed by a person who made a gift to a registered political party (or a State branch), or to another person or organisation with thé intention of benefiting a registered political party. This return is to be completed with reference to the Financial Disclosure Guide for Donors to Potiticat Parties. ¡ Further information is available at www.aec.ôov.au. o This return will be available for public inspection from Monday 1 February 2016 al www.aec.qov.au. Any supporting documentation included with this return may be treated as part of a public disclosure and displayed on the AEC website. o The information on this return is collected under the Commonweatth ElectoralAct 1918. \' NOTE: This form is for the use of individuals only. Please use the form Political Party Disclosure Return- Organisations if you are completing a retum for an organisation. Details of person that made the donation Name CLIVE FREDERICK PALMER Postal address PO BOX 1538 Suburb/Town BRISBANE QLD 400 Telephone number (07) 38322044 ( ) Email address s. mole@mi neralogyy.com.au Gertification I certify that the information contained in this return and its attachments is true and complete to the best of my knowtedge information and belief. I understand that giving false or misleading information rs a serious offence. Signature Enquiries and retums Funding and Disclosure Phohe: 026271 4552 should be addressed to: Australian Electoral Commission Fax: 0262937655 PO Box6172 Email: [email protected] Kingston ACT 2604 Office use only Date received DAR_1_indiv.
    [Show full text]
  • Resignation Statements Start Being Written
    Before I get into the events of the last week of my involvement in the WikiLeaks Party let me set the context of my involvement. 2009. I was the out going president of the recently liquidated Victorian College of the Arts Student Union. The VCA had been adsorbed into the University of Melbourne and Sharman “The Chainsaw” Pretty has been appointed Dean to tighten the belt and make the school less of a burden on UoM. We students together with teachers and industry who were standing up to the mighty behemoth were then given some important information. Proof that UoM were planning to rip the guts out of the college and leave it to die in mediocrity. Through some friends of the cause we had been given the VCs secret plans. “Faculty of the Victorian College of the Arts and Music Business Plan 2010 FINAL” is the title of the document “Great!” we said, “Now! Where to put it so everyone can see?” “Upload website?” “It's been taken down...” “Found another!” “It's down again...” *extensive google search* “What about this WikiLeaks.org thing I just found?” And there the document still is: http://www.wikileaks.org/wiki/Victorian_College_of_the_Arts_and_Music_Business_Plan _2010_final_summary,_2009 WikiLeaks, that I now know, a place willing to stand up for all that is right and show the world the truth, whether governments like it or not. It enabled us to always have a safe place to put documents to point to the atrocities in the world. So began my exploration into this place of transparency. Not long after I discover the Pirate Party of Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • Todd Farrell Thesis
    The Australian Greens: Realignment Revisited in Australia Todd Farrell Submitted in fulfilment for the requirements of the Doctorate of Philosophy Swinburne University of Technology Faculty of Health, Arts and Design School of Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities 2020 ii I declare that this thesis does not incorporate without acknowledgement any material previously submitted for a degree in any university or another educational institution and to the best of my knowledge and belief it does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text. iii ABSTRACT Scholars have traditionally characterised Australian politics as a stable two-party system that features high levels of partisan identity, robust democratic features and strong electoral institutions (Aitkin 1982; McAllister 2011). However, this characterisation masks substantial recent changes within the Australian party system. Growing dissatisfaction with major parties and shifting political values have altered the partisan contest, especially in the proportionally- represented Senate. This thesis re-examines partisan realignment as an explanation for party system change in Australia. It draws on realignment theory to argue that the emergence and sustained success of the Greens represents a fundamental shift in the Australian party system. Drawing from Australian and international studies on realignment and party system reform, the thesis combines an historical institutionalist analysis of the Australian party system with multiple empirical measurements of Greens partisan and voter support. The historical institutionalist approach demonstrates how the combination of subnational voting mechanisms, distinctly postmaterialist social issues, federal electoral strategy and a weakened Labor party have driven a realignment on the centre-left of Australian politics substantial enough to transform the Senate party system.
    [Show full text]
  • Global Meet Decries Impunity, Demands Accountability
    BUSINESS | 01 SPORT | 12 Create coaching Eto’o culture to develop unveiled as high-performing SC Global organisations Ambassador Monday 15 April 2019 | 10 Sha'baan 1440 www.thepeninsula.qa Volume 24 | Number 7862 | 2 Riyals Get Apple Watch Series 4 (GPS + Cellular) at Ooredoo. Global meet decries Amir meets Commander of US CENTCOM impunity, demands accountability QNA The major global rights mechanisms; chairpersons DOHA event is an important of the European Parliament forum for deliberating committees and national human Prime Minister and Interior rights institutions, the Organi- Minister H E Sheikh Abdullah bin on the assessment sation for Security and Co-oper- Nasser bin Khalifa Al Thani and development ation in Europe, research centres opened the International of national, regional and think-tanks in Europe and Conference on National, Regional other relevant bodies as well as and International Mechanisms to and international regional networks of national Combat Impunity and Ensure mechanisms to combat human rights institutions. Accountability under Interna- impunity and ensure This major global event is the tional Law, at the Ritz-Carlton accountability under world’s largest international Hotel yesterday morning. conference on the prevention of The conference is organised international law. impunity in the Middle East, and by the National Human Rights an important forum for deliber- Committee (NHRC), in part- contractual and non-contractual ating on the assessment and nership with the European Par- committees, experts and judges development of national, liament, the United Nations High of specialised international tri- regional and international Commissioner for Human Rights bunals and the International mechanisms to combat impunity and the Global Alliance of Criminal Court, as well as and ensure accountability under National Human Rights experts and lawyers who have the international law.
    [Show full text]