Greens unscientific Scare mongering about Bayside Armageddon proven to be a lie.

In the lead up to the 2006 State election the Greens campaigned in opposition to the dredging of the bay to allow shipping to Melbourne's ports.

The sacre campaign engaged by the greens has proved dot be false. The Bay has survived and there is no monumental environmental impact caused by the Bay dredging project.

Sen-Constable Patrick Stainthorpe and Constable Amanda Spittal
survey Sandringham beach. Pictures: JASON SAMMON.

Bay-side expert Dr. Graham Harris, who led a four-year study on the bay in the 1990s, has released his findings after examining the 50-chapter environmental effects statement on the Channel Deepening Project. Dr Harris said some of his initial fears were allayed by the environmental study, which he described as "not a bad document". He was no longer concerned about changes in tide, sea level or wave height or the risks of more exotic species invading.

"I am also of the opinion that the potential effects of oil spills, noise, lights at night, aesthetics, etc, are also not major and will be of short-term impact," said Dr Harris, the former head of CSIRO land and water division.

You can fool some of the people all the time., all of the people some of the time BUT you can not fool all of the people all the time.

The Greens in 2006 sought to capitalise on the Community fear that their beach would become a barren sea-scape. Not true. More lies.

Voters of Sandringham, Brighton and Port Phillip will think twice before they trust the Greens again. 

The Greens of course have tried to blame some of the tide shifting sands on Melbourne's beaches on the Bay Dredging, but environmental reviews have found that shifting sands are a normal occurrences due to tidal movements that have existed in the bay for centuries certinaly ever since records have been kept. There has been no adverse impact on te bay caused by the dreging of the entrance to the bay.

Now that the Greens scare mongering has been exposed the question is will voters of Melbourne's Bay-side communities be duped a second time into supporting the Greens.

Southern Metro: Target 14% or less

Analysis of the Group voting tickets in Southern Metropolitan shows that in order to restore balance in the upper-house the Greens need to be pegged back to below 14% which is the tipping threshold. below 14% and the ALP wins two seats to the Liberal Parties three.

Issues that are likely to threaten the Greens is their failed campaign on Port Phillip Bay dredging.  The Greens ran a scare campaign back in 2006.  The concerns raised by the Greens turned out to be false.  Every concern the Greens raised about the Bay dredging was false.  Voters were conned into thinking Armageddon was on the door steps. Only voters revolt against the Green lies and deceit.

TARGET GREENS BELOW 14%

Southern Metro:DLP preference - anti Jewish pro-Catholic

The DLP in Southern metropolitan has displayed what could be seen as a anti Jewish vote. The referenced through the Christan Alliance (Family First, Fred Nile) With Vern Hughes in the middle, stopping off at the Independent then to John Lenders. Lenders will never see the vote under the existing counting rules as he will have been already elected by the time the DLP is eliminated from the count.  Instead of flowing down the ALP ticket the DLP jumped straight to the Liberal Party number three candidate George Crozier who is only Liberal candidate remaining at this stage in the count.


The DLP will be lucky to poll 2% in Southern Metro but they ill pick up votes from Fred Nile and Vern Hughes which will see them above Family First.  They will stop on 5%.  and will be eliminated at which time the Liberal Party's George Crozier will be elected.

SEX Party swings to Liberals: Labor tipped to lose a seat

Preference deals and the SEX PARTY, DLP, FAMILY FIRST, CHRISTIANS, CIVIL SOCIETY in Southern Metropolitan will deliver a third upper-house seat to the Liberal Party placing Labor in the doubtful column for winning to seats.

Analysis of Southern Metropolitan Group voting tickets shows

[A] SEX PARTY: >  Vern Huges > Liberal
[B] DLP:> Christian (Fred Nile) > Vern Huges > Family First > Independent >Liberal  
[C] FAMILY FIRST:> Christian (Fred Nile) > Vern Huges > DLP >Independent >Liberal
[D] CHRISTIAN PARTY:>  DLP > Family First > Liberal
[E] CIVIL SOCIETY (Mayne):> Independent > Sex > DLP > Family First > Greens > Christian (Fred Nile) > Liberal
[F] GREENS:> Civil Society (Mayne) > Sex > Labor
[G] LIBERAL: > Family First > DLP > Christian (Fred Nile) > Vern Huges > Sex > Independent > Labor
[H] LABOR:> Greens > Sex > Vern Huges > independent > DLP

Prediction Liberal: 3, Labor: 1, Greens: 1

Sigh of Relief: Greens back down in the last minute on split ticket proposal

The Greens, power brokers, under pressure have backed down on issuing a split ticket in Victoria's Southern Metropolitan upper-house region.

Greens numbers man, Stephen Luntz, was in the VEC Melbourne office 10 minutes to 12 registering the Greens group voting tickets.  Registration of Group voting tickets closed at 12 noon today.

There was considerable concern that the Greens would trade off upper-house seats for Liberal preference in inner city lower-house seats.

The Greens were under pressure to not issue a split ticket as it would have attracted wide publicity and cost the Greens support across the State.

ABC Electoral Analyst, Antony Green, in commenting on the proposal of a split ticket said that "If the Greens issued a Split Ticket it would be the highlight of the campaign".

Public discussion and community concern played a major role in the decision of the Greens to not issue a split ticket. Had the Greens issued a split ticket the Liberal Party would have won three seats in Southern Metropolitan.

Luntz in exiting the VEC was reported as saying that they had preferenced Independents, the Sex Party then the ALP.

Update: Sex Party, DLP and others have preferenced the Liberal Party before the ALP and as such will deliver the Liberal Party a thrid seat in Southern Metropolitian. (ALP: 1, LNP: 3, GRN: 1)

Antony Green analysis exposed

ABC Electoral Analyst, Antony Green, has been exposed publishing false and misleading information, In doing a comparison analysis between the 2010 Senate and the Victorian upper-house statistics Antony green excluded from his calculation pre-polling and postal votes. This omission has the effect of inflating the ALP and the Green preferences and underestimating the true value of the Liberal Party vote.

In responding to our question Antony Green stated:

GREEN COMMENT: I stand by figures. I have allocated all polling places by which region they lie in, including splitting electorates that lie in more than one region. I didn't include the pre-poll and postal votes because it rarely makes a massive difference.

Well it does make a difference and the margin between the ALP winning a second seat and the Liberal party winning three seats is much closer as a result.  If the Greens, as has been suggested her and on numerous other web sites, issue a split ticket they will be giving the Liberal party a heads up  The analysis provided by Anthony Green of ALP 2, LNO 2. Gen 1) is wrong.

GREEN COMMENT: Why should I allocate a split Green preference ticket? You assert the Greens will do this. If the Greens do issue a split ticket, we will know on Sunday and it will be the biggest story of the election campaign. I see no reason to start off analysis by assuming a flow of preferences that has never happened.

Well Sunday is a bit late the public need to be properly informed.  Antony Green in not publishing in more detail the margin for a change in outcome has mislead the public.  On comparing the Southern Metro to Senate vote the margin is within 1-2% and a split Green ticket would favour the Liberal Party. Anthony Green should know this to be true but he committed to mention this fact. Why?  He makes all kinds of predictions after all is not the swing chart a prediction based on statistical data? To publish an incomplete data set is another issue that only compounds the omission.

Greens Preference to deliver control of upper house to Liberal party

The Greens are desperate to en sure that the Liberal Party Direct preferences to them in inner city seats that they plan to cut a preference deal to deliver the Liberal party control of the upper house.

The Greens will  try and hide this fact by issuing a Split Ticket claiming that the spit ticket will be fair and neither favours the Liberal Party or the ALP.  This is a lie. A direct cover up.  A split ticket will ensure that the Liberal Party will win three seats in Southern Metropolitan upper house seat.   Like is a spit ticket would also deliver the Liberal party top three additional upper house seats.

Party Group voting tickets close on Sunday 12:00 noon

The Greens are actively trying to cover up  this disclosure as is evident by William Bowe's and others (including Antony Green) denial .

In Southern Metro the Greens are expected to secure upto 19% of the vote and pick up preferences along the way at the point of exclusion the Greens will be on 0.45 quota, the LNP 0.80 quota and the ALP 0.75 quota. A Greens split ticket would deliver the LNP the final fifth seat.

Update: Senior Liberal members who met today are so concerned about the possibility of a 1999 hung parliament with the Greens holding the balance of power that they are considering handing out their own how to vote card in defiance with their own party's direction.  They are backed by a number of other groups who are opposed to the Greens policies such as legalised drug taking and  gay marriage.