I'm not sure anyone is surprised, but everyone's favourite Attorney-General has managed to hold his seat despite a swing of 14% against him. The Gamers 4 Croydon Rep Kat Nicholson managed a reasonable 3.6% of votes, which saw her beat Family First (3.2%) and the Democrats (2.5%). Whilst I suspect noone believed G4C would actually win, it's still a fairly good showing for the group's first foray into State Politics (and beating Family First is always a good thing, regardless).

http://img532.imageshack.us/img532/9823/201003205y9qkpywnw69wtr.jpg

Wonder where we'll be going from here with the R18+ debate, now Atkinson's firmly entrenched for another term?

However long his term is is the minimum time remaining for no 18+ for games, he will veto it every time, meh import is the only viable option in Aus regardless of ratings.

Far far far more interesting is the total votes count, 14084 total votes..... and he can veto on issues that affect the entire population of Australia. Broken system is broken.

oops double post.

It's okay, you can say that twice:

Far far far more interesting is the total votes count, 14084 total votes..... and he can veto on issues that affect the entire population of Australia. Broken system is broken.

That's misleading, because if he was really a renegade that was doing things contrary to his party then they would get rid of him.

That's misleading, because if he was really a renegade that was doing things contrary to his party then they would get rid of him.

Well, by getting voted in the idea is that his electorate supports him.

However, on the censorship minister issue - that's a country issue because of his role as Attorney-General - it's a much much wider issue than just his electorate, however they are still the only people voting him in. In that case, yeah, he's a bit renegade.

Well, by getting voted in the idea is that his electorate supports him.

No s***.
Lets look at the flipside of the argument, if G4C got 15000 votes, would that chick become attorney general and now have veto power? No she wouldn't.
Sure him getting voted out might cause labour to have a rethink on the issue, but if that happened you could make the same argument of 15000 people changing government policy.

That's misleading, because if he was really a renegade that was doing things contrary to his party then they would get rid of him.

Without even bothering to google I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that at least one of the other Attorney-Generals is a Labor member and since all others are in favour of the R-18 rating I'll go out on another limb and say it isn't party policy as you are implying.

I'm saying that if the party was so against it they would/could do something about it.

Without even bothering to google I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that at least one of the other Attorney-Generals is a Labor member and since all others are in favour of the R-18 rating I'll go out on another limb and say it isn't party policy as you are implying.

According to an article I read on Kotaku last year I think on the ACT and VIC A-G's have openly said they support an R18+ for games. The other six have said nothing, and Atkinson has openly spoken agains the category. However, Atkinson dropped in a media talk once that he's not the only one against it - he basically alluded to the fact that other A-G's were against an R18+ category for games.

What's so amazing is that anyone thought he'd get voted out. We have 1 maybe 2 generations of gamers and probably even less hardcore gamers wanting this 18+ thing and there's bound to be 3 or 4 generations of our parents, grandparents and even great grandparents voting against it.

Bit like this internet filter thing, there's only a handful of tech savvy people who know how good or bad it will truly be and then there's the overwhelming majority of the population who just believe whatever the media tells them and the media tells them if you oppose the filter you're a terrorist who loves kiddies.

Well at least he was less popular this time around..

if labor loses is he still the AG ?

I'm surprised G4C got as many votes as they did.

That said, the SA liberals must be as useless as they are here not to have a huge campaign in that seat against him.

Labor won.

Atkinson remains. 14% swing is nothing given he still won with 64% of the preferred vote.

Also, its attorneys-general, not attorney-generals.

Guys, just like to point out that there was still 40% of the vote to be counted when this was posted. So while Atkinson will still win, the numbers for other candidates may change slightly.

I think the G4C thing was still useful even if it was a loss. It created some media attention around the issue, and that's always a good thing.

Yeah, but he still probably won on the basis that he had 'Labour' next to his name on the ticket, not based on anyone knowing anything about him.

And so once again party systems fail.

/queue Obes to say, "It's labor you idiots", hahaha. C'mon Obes, do it.

14% swing is bloody 14% swing. It's a clear message - to Atkinson himself and to the party. It's enough to say, "Hmm, look over here"

14% swing is bloody 14% swing. It's a clear message - to Atkinson himself and to the party. It's enough to say, "Hmm, look over here"

Not in this context it isn't:

Antony Green on Twitter writes the swing was 1.7 per cent in marginal Labor seats, 7.7 per cent in safe Labor seats and 11.3 per cent in very safe Labor seats.

Link. If those numbers hold then the net 12.4% swing to Libs is right about average for a very safe Labor seat and after a quick scan only ranks 7th on the ALP -> Lib swings by my count. Makes the result in Croydon blend into the background.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/attorney-general-michael-atkinson-to-quit-front-bench/story-e6frea6u-1225843341005

TROUBLE-plagued Attorney-General Michael Atkinson is expected to announce within the next few minutes that he will not recontest the ministry, following the State Election.

Wow neffo, nice find.

Bazinga, he obviously had a talking to by the party and was told if he has a huge swing against him that he should step aside. Or probably even got told he should step aside either way.

that s*** better happen, maybe a gaming leather clad biker has treated him to another letter

TROUBLE-plagued Attorney-General Michael Atkinson has announced he will not recontest the ministry and will retire to the back bench.

He will retire to the back bench and serve his full term but will not recontest the seat of Croydon in 2014.

Chakas, you may be right, but we're talking about Atkinson here. The guy who thought it would be a good idea to censor blogs during an election. The same guy who came up with anti-bikie laws. His ideas can't be popular within the party. He's like the Barnaby Joyce of the ALP, but worse. Hmmm, actually that's a tough call who's worse...

Pinky, that's probably why he's shuffling to the back bench. He's been a lightning rod for controversy it seems, but I doubt they wanted the black eye of him leaving before a possibly close election (would have given the opposition a lot of ammo), so he's slowly moving out of the way on what seems like his own terms (that's just my opinion).

More news

From the article nF posted:

Mr Atkinson said that it would be irresponsible, given the Government's majority of one, to create a by-election in those circumstances.

Regardless of how many seats the government is in the majority - it would be irresponsible to contest an election and then resign without good reason as soon as you get elected you drongo. By-elections cost the taxpayer time and money, politicians seem to think the electoral fairies pick up the bill.

Best news I've had all day.

Unless some conservative in Tasmania does an Atkinson.

http://i45.tinypic.com/311rgpz.gif

Pinky, that's probably why he's shuffling to the back bench. He's been a lightning rod for controversy it seems, but I doubt they wanted the black eye of him leaving before a possibly close election (would have given the opposition a lot of ammo), so he's slowly moving out of the way on what seems like his own terms (that's just my opinion).

Yeah definitely agree with that. I don't think Atkinson was ever the fall-guy - I reckon he just caused his own controversy with his whacko ideas.

Dazhel has a pretty good point - but from a Labor party perspective Atkinson still has a lot of experience and a lot to offer the party in terms of how to run the show, so I don't think it's that irresponsible.

One thing is for sure: the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions) will have me glued to news.

Well this is nice to hear... but i gotta wonder how much say he will have on who replaces him??? Will we just get a younger and fresher version of him?

Now to see Conroy go.

Its a shame that labor held on.

At least with Atkinson gone there is hope of change for game classification.

Hopefully the new person isn't as traditional as him.

if labor loses is he still the AG

Did anyone answer this? Because iirc, he still will be, it's 2 seperate jobs basically. So even retiring to the back bench of politics, he can still be a states AG. In fact, he probably gets paid more as AG than front bencher of some s***ty political party in some even s***tier state.

Read my post

the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions)

Its still not even confirmed that the R18+ for games issue is on the table for the next meeting of Attorneys-General.

Did anyone answer this? Because iirc, he still will be, it's 2 seperate jobs basically. So even retiring to the back bench of politics, he can still be a states AG. In fact, he probably gets paid more as AG than front bencher of some s***ty political party in some even s***tier state.

bahahahahaha you couldn't be more wrong.

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

Do you really think a Liberal government would have a Labor AG?

the next Standing Meeting of the Attorneys-General on April 29th (when they raise the R18+ discussion paper conclusions)

Its still not even confirmed that the R18+ for games issue is on the table for the next meeting of Attorneys-General.

That's true. The input could swing it either way as well. It had the largest amount of feedback for a discussion submission ever (something like 55k submissions) so that could mean they will prioritise it or it could mean they will say, "We need more time to process this."

I personally think they will get it on the table because the March/April meeting is the censorship meeting, seems like the obvious thing to address and surely the Feb 28th cut-off date is simply in place to be able to get the issue sorted at the April meeting. Otherwise we just wait until November.

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/38103/Switzerland-passes-violent-games-ban

Pinky - yeah I have no problems with what Atkinson's done - if he heads up the back bench until 2014 but doesn't resume ministerial duties, that's fine. I just have a pet peeve for those politicians that cause a by-election because they haven't made a commitment to serve the full term.

Resigning from the politics should be reserved for situations like when someone is critical/terminally ill or there's a serious impediment that prevents the job from being done, not getting offered sweet private sector job or for when they win the seat but lose government etc.

Conroy and Atkinson
I can never remember which d******* is which

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government. I'm sorry if my incorrectness offended you.

The AG is a minister of the government. If that government loses, then the new government will have a new AG.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government. I'm sorry if my incorrectness offended you.

Your incorrectness is repulsive casa. Begone.

To which I thought he was a minister of the federal government.

There's a federal Attorney-General as well as Attorneys-General at the State level.

Your in-correctness is only offensive if you, and people like you, wrote submissions on the R18+ issue. As lots of time will be wasted on submissions that are factually and legally incorrect.