00:00:00
Speaker 1: Well, yesterday, with a degree of trepidation, we were breaking at eight. That's outed too bizarre to believe. But I'd been told reliably that a box of several hundred votes that were cast in a seat neighboring the seat of Narunga, which invited speculation that as ebsent te votes declaration votes, they could potentially include votes that were cast in the neighboring seat of Narranga. Well, as it happened, every word of that was true. A box had been overlooked. It contained some six hundred and sixty odd votes. Eighty one of those votes were cast for the seat of Narranga, Narunga being the seat where One Nation candidate Chantel Thomas succeeded by just fifty eight votes against the Liberal candidate. Well, if seventy of the eighty one votes there that were eligible were to transfer against Chantel Thomas back to the Liberal Party, the Liberal part he could argue that it won the seat. It would have to be.
00:01:03
Speaker 2: It would have I mean, based on the counter votes, it will have won the seat.
00:01:06
Speaker 1: Well, the seat's already been declared, that's right, So you have to get super complicated and it goes to.
00:01:10
Speaker 2: Court at that point in time. Yeah, well, but they need fifty nine of those eighty one votes to change to go their way, so they need to break seventy two percent to the liberals. There wasn't a single booth where they're where that happened, So I think.
00:01:26
Speaker 1: Outside of brag where that would have happened.
00:01:28
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right.
00:01:30
Speaker 1: Our next guest Carlos Krember, friend of the program, long standing caller, one nation state president and Carlos, can I just ask mate, with your background as a builder, have you thought about maybe building a house in your potentially given the amount of time you've spent there over the last month.
00:01:44
Speaker 3: Oh, good morning, lads. This election has been like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get. Yeah, it's an interesting turn of events. But I'll be going there today from the job site to scrutiny to make sure that everything's above board. But we're very confident that nothing's going to change.
00:02:02
Speaker 1: It is. It's a weird situation, though, isn't it. Carlos When When when? Because we spoke off here about it yesterday to texting back and forth, and what was your reaction when you heard it?
00:02:13
Speaker 3: Oh? Well, obviously The first I heard of it was on your radio program on the way into work, and I was sort of shaking their head. But you know, like, if you look at the whole election, there's been a lot of problems, and I think this is what a parliamentary inquiry with a full set of a good set of terms of reference will actually saw all this out. I don't want to throw the Electric Commission under the bus. I think there's a lot of questions that need to be answered. I think we need to follow the process and then just make sure it never happens again.
00:02:41
Speaker 1: Does it engender suspicion that I mean, I don't want to sound like, you know, Donald Trump after it costs to Joe Biden, but you hear about hang, I now we found another box. You can understand people going, well, have you found all the boxes?
00:02:54
Speaker 3: And look, that's one thing that I've been getting a lot from even some of the candidates that ran for us, a lot of people in the community, and that is the last thing we need is to lose trust in the electual process. I mean, it never works out well for any country when they don't trust the process. So, as I said, a parliamentary inquiry should get to the bottom of this, and I would hope that the Labor Party would support it because ultimately, even though there are at an arm's length from the Electoral Commission, they are they do do the funding and I don't think it's from what I've spoken to some of the Electoral Commission people, I don't think the funding was adequate.
00:03:29
Speaker 2: Oh sorry, well, Carlos was going to say, we see your leader, Corey, but Art quoted in the paper this morning saying that you've abandoned your bid to form the official opposition. That won't be happening before parliament. Did you chat with every independent to gauge their interest in perhaps working with you to become the opposition?
00:03:46
Speaker 3: Oh look, I didn't chat with any of the Independence. That was Corey's job as the leader, and he'll do what's in the best interest of the state and the party. But I'm just getting ready to get back into Parliament. I mean, I'm still on a job site now, you know. I've had a lot of queris as to while we're not doing anything. Well, I'm not actually getting paid by the tax park at the moment, I'm actually waiting for concrete to rock up to one of my jobs. So you know, when that time comes, you know we will be ready and we will be good to go, and we'll be the best we can and we'll be a really strong voice of opposition Incalves Australia. Regardless of whether it's the official term or not, we will be pushing back on this government because there's a lot to push back on.
00:04:24
Speaker 2: So is this your last building site then, Carlos.
00:04:28
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I think it is, even though you know, when you consider of all the people that probably shouldn't give up their job to go into parliament, me being a builder, wig not exactly. You know, we're not running with a lot of them, so that'll be one less guy that's going to be building houses. But look, I think there's a lot we can do from a parliamentary point to actually make housing more affordable and more houses being built. And that's one of the things that's going to be one of my biggest focuses because like right now, we have a generation of youth that will never own a home in their own country and that's just unacceptable.
00:05:00
Speaker 1: Good on your callous Karlos. Karremrody's way back to the York's Yet again, we've got Clem McIntyre, Adelaide University Emeritus Professor of Politics, on the line for this as well and claim, good morning. It's a weird situation this one, isn't it.
00:05:13
Speaker 4: Yes, that's putting it mildly. It's not the sort of thing you expect. But as you've just heard, there were a few problems through the electoral process on election day in terms of booze opening late so on, and this appears to be yet another little misstep the commission, which is a concern. But look, I don't think we should entertain for a minute, and it's this suspicion of boxes going missing on a deliberate basis. I just I don't give that any credibility.
00:05:46
Speaker 1: Yeah, but for it to have happened though, I mean, it's not corruption, but it's not to described as kind of incompetent.
00:05:55
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's not a good look, there's no doubt about that. But to suggest it's corruption be to imply that whoever misplaced the boxes knew the contents of the vote. Because if I suddenly find a box of votes and it turns the election around, then I'm not going to hide them unless I know what the outcome is going to be. And there's no way that any electoral official would know how those votes have been cast, and I think the numbers we're dealing with are so small that the chance of turning the election result around is very slight. It's important that they're counted and that we get an accurate reflection of what the voters genuinely wanted. But I think all indications are this is an oversight and the mistake nothing more serious than now that in itself is a concern, and the review that takes place after every election, doubtless this time will be slightly more challenging and testing for the Electoral Commission that it might otherwise have.
00:07:04
Speaker 2: Been as mathematically unlikely as a change of polling leader is. Do we have a precedent for a declared winner having their position overturned? What's the mechanism by which that would actually have to happen?
00:07:19
Speaker 4: Well, the nearest president I can think of is I think it was twenty thirteen in the West Australian Senate election when a couple of thousand Senate votes were found. And look, I haven't gone back and looked at the figures exactly, but from memory, that did overturn a result. I think one of the very minor parties had just got out of the line and the extra votes reversed that. I can't think of an example in South Australia, it's happened. But my understanding, I'm not trying to be an expert on this, but my understanding is that the result has formerly been declared and that the One Nation candidate Chantel Thomas has declared to be the winner, and the count that will take place today, the Electoral Commission is effectively looking and saying, had we counted all the votes, would that result be the same? Now? Clearly, if the result is the same, then there's no need to do anything other than makes some inquiries as to why the ballot box were those votes went missing. If, on the other hand, in the unlikely case that the Liberals pick up enough votes to turn the election around, then I would guess the result would be referred to the Court of Disputed Returns and that that's effectively judge of the Supreme Court who sits and hears cases from the Electoral Commission and any interested parties are I political parties and would make a determination either to reverse the result or to call for a fresh election.
00:08:57
Speaker 1: Yeah, I reckon, that would be the most technically stupid thing in the world the Liberal Party could agitate for. Thinking back to when Jackie Kelly became an MP in Western Sydney in the Howard era, when Ross Free was the sitting Labor member after the ninety six election loss by Keating to John Howard, and the Labor tried to dud Jackie Kelly on a technicality that she was a dual New Zealand citizen and they had a by election, and she ran on the campaign slogan effectively of I've been martyred and persecuted by the ALP, and her vote went up, became a safe seat for John Howard. She was the pinup girl for what were known as the Howard Battler's, the mortgagee belt of Penrith and so forth. So, you know, with one nation really garnering that sense of the major parties ganging up on us, if they had a by election, there sh until Thomas I reckon she'd win it by ten percent, not fifty eight votes.
00:09:57
Speaker 4: I suspect you might be right. So you know, the only hope that the Liberal Party would have would be that the Court of this bit of returns would simply reverse the result. But look, we're getting into the grounds of some far fetched speculators.
00:10:15
Speaker 1: We are.
00:10:15
Speaker 4: We've got, I think it's eighty one votes that are to be added to the count, and the Liberals need to pick up, you know, sort of ninety percent of those in order to turn the result around. Now, the chances of those votes falling that way, given the rest of the election are pretty slight.
00:10:32
Speaker 2: Well yeah, exactly.
00:10:34
Speaker 1: Great analysis is always Clem mcintie from Adelaide University. Thank you.
Speaker 1: Well, yesterday, with a degree of trepidation, we were breaking at eight. That's outed too bizarre to believe. But I'd been told reliably that a box of several hundred votes that were cast in a seat neighboring the seat of Narunga, which invited speculation that as ebsent te votes declaration votes, they could potentially include votes that were cast in the neighboring seat of Narranga. Well, as it happened, every word of that was true. A box had been overlooked. It contained some six hundred and sixty odd votes. Eighty one of those votes were cast for the seat of Narranga, Narunga being the seat where One Nation candidate Chantel Thomas succeeded by just fifty eight votes against the Liberal candidate. Well, if seventy of the eighty one votes there that were eligible were to transfer against Chantel Thomas back to the Liberal Party, the Liberal part he could argue that it won the seat. It would have to be.
00:01:03
Speaker 2: It would have I mean, based on the counter votes, it will have won the seat.
00:01:06
Speaker 1: Well, the seat's already been declared, that's right, So you have to get super complicated and it goes to.
00:01:10
Speaker 2: Court at that point in time. Yeah, well, but they need fifty nine of those eighty one votes to change to go their way, so they need to break seventy two percent to the liberals. There wasn't a single booth where they're where that happened, So I think.
00:01:26
Speaker 1: Outside of brag where that would have happened.
00:01:28
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right.
00:01:30
Speaker 1: Our next guest Carlos Krember, friend of the program, long standing caller, one nation state president and Carlos, can I just ask mate, with your background as a builder, have you thought about maybe building a house in your potentially given the amount of time you've spent there over the last month.
00:01:44
Speaker 3: Oh, good morning, lads. This election has been like a box of chocolates. You never know what you're going to get. Yeah, it's an interesting turn of events. But I'll be going there today from the job site to scrutiny to make sure that everything's above board. But we're very confident that nothing's going to change.
00:02:02
Speaker 1: It is. It's a weird situation, though, isn't it. Carlos When When when? Because we spoke off here about it yesterday to texting back and forth, and what was your reaction when you heard it?
00:02:13
Speaker 3: Oh? Well, obviously The first I heard of it was on your radio program on the way into work, and I was sort of shaking their head. But you know, like, if you look at the whole election, there's been a lot of problems, and I think this is what a parliamentary inquiry with a full set of a good set of terms of reference will actually saw all this out. I don't want to throw the Electric Commission under the bus. I think there's a lot of questions that need to be answered. I think we need to follow the process and then just make sure it never happens again.
00:02:41
Speaker 1: Does it engender suspicion that I mean, I don't want to sound like, you know, Donald Trump after it costs to Joe Biden, but you hear about hang, I now we found another box. You can understand people going, well, have you found all the boxes?
00:02:54
Speaker 3: And look, that's one thing that I've been getting a lot from even some of the candidates that ran for us, a lot of people in the community, and that is the last thing we need is to lose trust in the electual process. I mean, it never works out well for any country when they don't trust the process. So, as I said, a parliamentary inquiry should get to the bottom of this, and I would hope that the Labor Party would support it because ultimately, even though there are at an arm's length from the Electoral Commission, they are they do do the funding and I don't think it's from what I've spoken to some of the Electoral Commission people, I don't think the funding was adequate.
00:03:29
Speaker 2: Oh sorry, well, Carlos was going to say, we see your leader, Corey, but Art quoted in the paper this morning saying that you've abandoned your bid to form the official opposition. That won't be happening before parliament. Did you chat with every independent to gauge their interest in perhaps working with you to become the opposition?
00:03:46
Speaker 3: Oh look, I didn't chat with any of the Independence. That was Corey's job as the leader, and he'll do what's in the best interest of the state and the party. But I'm just getting ready to get back into Parliament. I mean, I'm still on a job site now, you know. I've had a lot of queris as to while we're not doing anything. Well, I'm not actually getting paid by the tax park at the moment, I'm actually waiting for concrete to rock up to one of my jobs. So you know, when that time comes, you know we will be ready and we will be good to go, and we'll be the best we can and we'll be a really strong voice of opposition Incalves Australia. Regardless of whether it's the official term or not, we will be pushing back on this government because there's a lot to push back on.
00:04:24
Speaker 2: So is this your last building site then, Carlos.
00:04:28
Speaker 3: Well, yeah, I think it is, even though you know, when you consider of all the people that probably shouldn't give up their job to go into parliament, me being a builder, wig not exactly. You know, we're not running with a lot of them, so that'll be one less guy that's going to be building houses. But look, I think there's a lot we can do from a parliamentary point to actually make housing more affordable and more houses being built. And that's one of the things that's going to be one of my biggest focuses because like right now, we have a generation of youth that will never own a home in their own country and that's just unacceptable.
00:05:00
Speaker 1: Good on your callous Karlos. Karremrody's way back to the York's Yet again, we've got Clem McIntyre, Adelaide University Emeritus Professor of Politics, on the line for this as well and claim, good morning. It's a weird situation this one, isn't it.
00:05:13
Speaker 4: Yes, that's putting it mildly. It's not the sort of thing you expect. But as you've just heard, there were a few problems through the electoral process on election day in terms of booze opening late so on, and this appears to be yet another little misstep the commission, which is a concern. But look, I don't think we should entertain for a minute, and it's this suspicion of boxes going missing on a deliberate basis. I just I don't give that any credibility.
00:05:46
Speaker 1: Yeah, but for it to have happened though, I mean, it's not corruption, but it's not to described as kind of incompetent.
00:05:55
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's not a good look, there's no doubt about that. But to suggest it's corruption be to imply that whoever misplaced the boxes knew the contents of the vote. Because if I suddenly find a box of votes and it turns the election around, then I'm not going to hide them unless I know what the outcome is going to be. And there's no way that any electoral official would know how those votes have been cast, and I think the numbers we're dealing with are so small that the chance of turning the election result around is very slight. It's important that they're counted and that we get an accurate reflection of what the voters genuinely wanted. But I think all indications are this is an oversight and the mistake nothing more serious than now that in itself is a concern, and the review that takes place after every election, doubtless this time will be slightly more challenging and testing for the Electoral Commission that it might otherwise have.
00:07:04
Speaker 2: Been as mathematically unlikely as a change of polling leader is. Do we have a precedent for a declared winner having their position overturned? What's the mechanism by which that would actually have to happen?
00:07:19
Speaker 4: Well, the nearest president I can think of is I think it was twenty thirteen in the West Australian Senate election when a couple of thousand Senate votes were found. And look, I haven't gone back and looked at the figures exactly, but from memory, that did overturn a result. I think one of the very minor parties had just got out of the line and the extra votes reversed that. I can't think of an example in South Australia, it's happened. But my understanding, I'm not trying to be an expert on this, but my understanding is that the result has formerly been declared and that the One Nation candidate Chantel Thomas has declared to be the winner, and the count that will take place today, the Electoral Commission is effectively looking and saying, had we counted all the votes, would that result be the same? Now? Clearly, if the result is the same, then there's no need to do anything other than makes some inquiries as to why the ballot box were those votes went missing. If, on the other hand, in the unlikely case that the Liberals pick up enough votes to turn the election around, then I would guess the result would be referred to the Court of Disputed Returns and that that's effectively judge of the Supreme Court who sits and hears cases from the Electoral Commission and any interested parties are I political parties and would make a determination either to reverse the result or to call for a fresh election.
00:08:57
Speaker 1: Yeah, I reckon, that would be the most technically stupid thing in the world the Liberal Party could agitate for. Thinking back to when Jackie Kelly became an MP in Western Sydney in the Howard era, when Ross Free was the sitting Labor member after the ninety six election loss by Keating to John Howard, and the Labor tried to dud Jackie Kelly on a technicality that she was a dual New Zealand citizen and they had a by election, and she ran on the campaign slogan effectively of I've been martyred and persecuted by the ALP, and her vote went up, became a safe seat for John Howard. She was the pinup girl for what were known as the Howard Battler's, the mortgagee belt of Penrith and so forth. So, you know, with one nation really garnering that sense of the major parties ganging up on us, if they had a by election, there sh until Thomas I reckon she'd win it by ten percent, not fifty eight votes.
00:09:57
Speaker 4: I suspect you might be right. So you know, the only hope that the Liberal Party would have would be that the Court of this bit of returns would simply reverse the result. But look, we're getting into the grounds of some far fetched speculators.
00:10:15
Speaker 1: We are.
00:10:15
Speaker 4: We've got, I think it's eighty one votes that are to be added to the count, and the Liberals need to pick up, you know, sort of ninety percent of those in order to turn the result around. Now, the chances of those votes falling that way, given the rest of the election are pretty slight.
00:10:32
Speaker 2: Well yeah, exactly.
00:10:34
Speaker 1: Great analysis is always Clem mcintie from Adelaide University. Thank you.
