CHOICE membership

Clive Palmer and his unsolicited SMS messages


That is a simplistic answer because there is much more to voting than a single cause, although it would be a good thing to have as part of a party’s platform.


Of course.

You can bet that you won’t find it in the Lib/Lab platform.

If that proves to be the case come election time and you vote for Lib/Lab anyway then you are (reluctantly) accepting the legal reality that political parties can spam you.


Yes, it was the farcical irony of the message that almost made me spit out my drink…


The comment was made in relation to the Clive Palmer texts for the Clive Palmer forth upcoming Federal election.

The same could easily apply to fix term State and local government elections. The date could be when the Legislative Assembly expires or the government goes in caretaker period. Both would be considered the commencement of the formal campaign period and usually occur about a month or so from the date of the election.


Don’t want them? Just don’t read them, press delete; it’s not that hard people. And yes, I received both of Clive’s messages, I read them both and took them with a large grain of salt.


That depends on why you receive SMS and how many important ones come in, and whether you might have had to pull over and park your vehicle to check them. If you are happy with the clutter they cause and are happy to see unsolicited political spamming SMS to delete them, please post your mobile number and many of us will be happy to forward the ones we receive for your personal processing.


In a Federal context, I had in mind, for example, Julia Gillard’s announcing on 1 Feb 2013 that the election would be on September 14 i.e. 225 days in advance.

“after the election date is announced” would be a bit too easy for the government of the day to rort. Do you want to be spammed for 225 days?

It needs to be based on the formal campaign period e.g. dissolution of parliament (min 33 days of spamming to polling day, max 68 days of spamming to polling day, per AEC web site).


If you think the same about spam emails (do you?) then it is not that simple. The substantial majority of emails that you would receive would be spam (i.e. if your service provider did not block most of it before it hits your mailbox).

There is no right or wrong answer for whether you should have a legal right to control what goes into your mailbox / SMS. Some people will say “no”. Some people will say “yes”.

To the extent that you actually do have such a legal right already, the question is whether electoral matter and/or political parties should be exempt.


But the governor general was not formally notified and asked to dissolve parliament…otherwise parliament would not have sat between the 1/2/13 and 4/8/13. Dissolving of parliament (formal notification of the election date rather than the earlier political notification) occurred on the 4/8/2013. The 4/8/13 was the start of the formal election campaign period.

No it isn’t and couldn’t occur for 225 days.

Once the governor general is notified and accepts the request to dissolve government for a general election, government is in caretaker mode and has no legislative power (any decisions made which must be made during this time, say in the case of an emergency, needs to be done with the agreement of the opposition parliament). In effect, the sitting government is in holding pattern.

I expect that should the government try this on…dissolve government and try for a 225 day period to the general election, either the dissolution would not be approved by the Governor general or the election would be called sooner by someone (High Court or GG). Not doing so would cripple the government (and Australia) and its function.

I think most constituents would expect during the usual formal campaign period (4-6 weeks) the receipt of political messages/advertising. Such acceptance outside this period, as Clive has found out, is less tolerated.

It appears that our country’s forefathers identified these potential risks and provided protections in the Constitution for such cases.


The dev claims this was just done because he’s lazy, but I must admit it seems a little suspicious…


I think this discussion highlights the ambiguity in what is meant by “after the election date is announced”. Announced by whom? Under what circumstances? Using what mechanism? When exactly does that need to happen?

Referring to the AEC web site: I think it would be much more sensible to base the definition of “campaign period” off the dissolution of parliament / the expiry of parliament - whether or not the election date has been announced.

Dissolving the parliament does not fix the election date (polling date) - because there is flexibility built in to the schedule.

(It looks to me though that if the government wants to announce the election date 225 days in advance, the onus would be on the government then to request the GG to dissolve parliament on any date that is compatible with all of the constraints in the Constitution and in the Commonwealth Electoral Act. Hence why usual practice is to do the two things on the same day: 1. Request the GG to dissolve parliament and 2. Announce the election date.)

No, they can’t do that - see link to AEC web site regarding the required correlation between the date for dissolving the parliament and the date for the election. The absolute maximum is polling day 68 days after dissolution/expiry.

Meanwhile … UAP again in the news highlighting privacy weaknesses in the electoral system.

and it’s not only political parties that are abusing the electoral roll but the government too


It’s insulting when you are owed money from him.


I agree - despicable.


I am in Sydney and was surprised to get his annoying texts


Hi Brendan.

Are we allowed to nominate Clive Palmer for a Spot-A-Shonky entry or are “National Living Treasures” exempt?



Perhaps Neither @Fred123?:rofl:

There is nothing hidden or concealed here. What you see with Palmer is what you get. It’s only shonky if you are likely to believe there is any substance to what is being promoted?

Selling cow poo as something more valuable might be shonky. Selling cow poo as cow poo perhaps not. Although Clive may only have boy cows?:thinking:

“Living & National” - hard to avoid either based on the reaction to the SMS campaign.

“Treasure?” - cow poo may be valuable for the garden. Not sure if I’d describe it as a treasure. :wink:

It’s easy to spot an Elvis impersonation. Some are better than others.
Some might suggest it is just as easy to spot a would be Politician impersonating someone of interest, value or importance. Some are better at it than others.

No pedestal for Palmer on either count in this household?

P.S. especially since Clive appears to have misplaced my mobile number!


That gave me a chuckle. We often receive nominations for political parties and politicians, but but it’s out of bounds for the Shonkys (although with the anger these text messages have caused, I’m sure plenty would agree with your sentiment).


Maybe the award is a shonky. If one can canvass voting in their favour, one can become a national treasure?


Some would prefer their treasures to be burried. Preferably in a large chest on a lonely desert island, far from sight. :rofl:

And hopefully out of range of the mobile network? Just in case some one has attached a gps tracker so they can dig it up when needed again?