Destroyed bridges and stolen ballot boxes mar PNG by-election
Extra police and soldiers were deployed for the voting in the Porgera Paiela district in Enga province and all vehicles ordered off the roads to try and prevent election-related violence.
The area was already under a state of emergency because of ongoing outbreaks of tribal fighting.
Enga's police commander Fred Yakasa says polling in and around Porgera township was peaceful but two bridges were destroyed by a candidate's supporters in Mulitaka the site of last year's deadly landslide.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
8 hours ago
- News.com.au
Campaign to protect Sydney Mardi Gras amid ‘internal divisions' over police participation
Sydney's annual Mardi Gras parade is 'the most visible celebration of LGBT people around the world', but activists warn internal division has put its future at risk. An informal group of Mardi Gras members are campaigning to bring 'disillusioned' members back into the fold ahead of an annual general meeting expected in December. Also seeking new members, the Protect Mardi Gras campaign aims to 'protect' the inclusive character of the world-famous event and resist efforts to ban NSW police from participating. Organiser Peter Stahel said Mardi Gras members got 'within a handful of votes' in 2024 of banning police from attending the event following a string of controversies. 'It is the most visible celebration of LGBT people in the world, and it's incredible precious. I truly believe it saves lives – I really do,' Mr Stahel said of Mardi Gras. 'That's why we're doing this. We're not doing it because we want to protect the cops. We want to protect the cops' right to be in the parade. 'We want to protect that because of the power of Mardi Gras and the good that it does for people who are oftentimes really struggling to come to terms with who they are.' Mr Stahel believed the push to ban police, and the subsequent pushback against that, went beyond a 'difference of opinion'. He feared pushes to alienate certain groups from the parade would lead to other groups potentially being formally alienated as well in the future. 'They think we should ban cops. I disagree, but they're still welcome at Mardi Gras, right?' My Stahel said of groups opposed to police participation. 'So, what they're saying is 'anyone we disagree with shouldn't be invited'. 'Mardi Gras is built on this principle that in order to create change, you need to build alliances. 'You need to bring people in, you need to convince people, you need to change hearts, you need to change minds.' Mr Stahel said campaigners were not pushing back on 'understandable anxieties or concerns about the police'. 'What we are saying is, even if only one in 100 cops are a true ally, it makes no sense to reject that one person,' he said. 'Let's celebrate this person. Let's celebrate the fact that they are brave enough to stand up and be visible. 'That's what Mardi Gras has been doing since 1998 when the cops first joined the parade.' Mr Stahel pushed back on claims Mardi Gras had 'lost its way' as a protest, its origin rooted in bringing in people who might not otherwise have been able to be involved. The campaign has received the backing of 78er Peter Murphy, one of the initial activists who marched in the original Sydney Mardi Gras in 1978. While he said activists faced 'real and raw' police brutality in the early days, 'progress does not come only from shouting people down'. 'It comes from showing up, educating, challenging, and building alliances.' he said. Mr Murphy pushed back against what he said was a movement to ban 'LGBTQIA+ police, military, certain political parties, and corporate sponsors'. 'Their goal isn't to broaden the movement – it's to use it to punish,' he said. 'Their strategy is to stack the AGM, take over the board, and totally change what Mardi Gras is and has been.' Attempts to ban police from Mardi Gras were only narrowly defeated at last year's AGM. Members voted 493 to 459 against banning police. The failed resolution was moved by the Mardi Gras board and based on community consultation that it said found 54 per cent of respondents opposed police participation. It came after the alleged murders of Jesse Baird and Luke Davies by NSW Police officer Beau Lamarre-Condon – who has not entered any pleas and whose matter is still before the courts – as well as the Special Commission of Inquiry into LGBTIQ hate crimes. One of the groups advocating for police to be excluded is Pride in Protest. In a video shortly after the December AGM, the group said it was not a matter of if police would be excluded from the march but when. The group has been contacted for comment.
ABC News
14 hours ago
- ABC News
Sydney Harbour Bridge pro-Palestinian protest prompts warning to avoid 'non-essential travel'
Hundreds of police are set to descend on the harbour bridge ahead of a planned protest that will shut down Sydney's main traffic artery this afternoon. Police have now closed the Sydney Harbour Bridge ahead of the planned march at 1pm. Speaking to reporters on Sunday morning, Acting Assistant Commissioner Adam Johnson said "hundreds" of officers from across Sydney had been drafted in with concerns of "crowd crush". "Crowd crush is a real thing … the risk is the number [of protesters] is unknown." he said. "Ten thousand, fifty thousand, a hundred thousand. We really don't know. "We've put some things in place with [Palestine Action Group coordinator Josh] Lees to alleviate that." Assistant Commissioner Johnson said police "would not tolerate" anyone using the planned action as an excuse to break the law. "We said yesterday we're scrambling, but we've got committed staff to work around the clock to make it as safe as they can today," he said. "We just want the public to be safe today. "I've asked the police ot be reasonable, tempered and measured as they always are but please listen to their instructions." Pro-Palestinian supporters were asked to gather at Lang Park to march across the Harbour Bridge to finish in Bradfield Park in Milsons Point. Both Assistant Commissioner Johnson and Transport for NSW director of operations management Craig Moran warned the city's transport system would be stretched today. There will be six trains an hour from North Sydney, Mr Moran said, but with the Metro down, services are expected to be crowded on the rail network. "The key issue is we're encouraging people to avoid all non-essential travel," Mr Moran said. "People are going to be diverting from buses, so the trains are going to be very busy this afternoon." Hundreds of protesters had made their way into Lang Park in preparation for the pro-Palestinian March for Gaza. The march will be move across the harbour bridge after a Supreme Court judge ruled in favour of organisers, Palestine Action Group, on Saturday. Police confirmed there are at least 700 officers on the ground to secure the protest today and more involved in the operation as a whole. Protest organisers are hopeful many will brave the heavy rain to participate in what they describe as a historic event.
ABC News
14 hours ago
- ABC News
Vote counting done, the deal-making begins for Tasmania's next government
So here it is. The final seat chart for Tasmania's parliament: Liberals with 14, Labor with 10, five Greens and six other members of the crossbench. Sound familiar? Well, aside from some shuffling of the deckchairs, the 2025 Tasmanian election — not to be confused with the 2024 one (although you'd be forgiven for doing so) — ended up almost exactly where it was before Premier Jeremy Rockliff pulled the trigger. We can get to the whole what was the point later, but there is one rather vital question that has yet to be answered — who will be the government? Gone are the days when who would form government was known on election night. And, apparently, gone are the days when knowing the final makeup of parliament means we know which party will be leading the state at the end of the year. That answer may not be known for over a month. But at least the players are known, because the pathways to government or a no-confidence motion have become slightly clearer. Let's start with the Liberals on 14 seats. That may seem, on the face of things, to be a better chance. Whichever party hopes to form government will need 18 votes on their side. Finding four votes from a crossbench of 11 does not sound that hard in theory — until you start to break down who is in the crossbench. The Greens won't be offering up their five. Craig Garland is so infuriated by the way the Liberals have handled Marinus Link that he would be willing to vote for a no-confidence motion. Kristie Johnston voted for the last no-confidence motion and, while she hasn't ruled out offering supply and confidence, it may not be encouraging. That's six, maybe seven votes down, leaving four for the Liberals to truly court, with three of them newbies. The Shooters, Fishers and Farmers' Carlo Di Falco and former Launceston Councillor George Razay have both said they are open to working with either side. For the record, so has anti-salmon campaigner Peter George, but his progressive values don't mesh particularly well with either major party. The easiest person for the Liberals get, or in this case keep onside, is independent David O'Byrne. Mr O'Byrne offered support in the last parliament, voted against the no-confidence motion in Premier Jeremy Rockliff and has spoken about how difficult it was for Labor to govern with 10 when there were just 25 members of the lower house as opposed to the 35 they now have. Mind you, last election Labor ruled out trying to form government, so Mr O'Byrne had no other option. As a former Labor leader with those values, he has to entertain the idea. Labor's rather mammoth effort of securing eight votes is made so much easier by the fact the Greens want to engage with it. Greens Leader Rosalie Woodruff gave Labor Leader Dean Winter the opportunity to work together during that weird time between the no-confidence motion and the election. Mr Winter flat-out refused. But things look very different from the other side of this election. The party is out of options, down on votes, and staring down four years of opposition, assuming this parliament makes it that long. The very fact that Mr Winter is playing phone tag with Dr Woodruff says it all. But the two clearly have some different ideas about how a minority Labor government might work. Labor is continuing to insist it will not do a deal with the Greens, while Dr Woodruff maintains there must be an agreement for it to work. She may not be sure what that looks like, but has said "there is no possibility of any minority government without some movement". That suggests compromise. So, is Labor just playing semantics with the word deal? Will it accept a so-called agreement with the Greens? They will be roasted by the Liberals if they do, but how much does that matter if the Libs are the ones sitting on the Opposition benches? Perhaps, Labor thinks it can avoid doing any sort of agreement with The Greens. After all, the Greens seem very determined to kick out the Rockliff Government — even more so post Marinus drama — and Labor is their only path to do so. Maybe that is all Labor has to offer up. Be it on the Greens if they want to be the key reason the Liberals stay in power. But there is a middle ground. The parties' values overlap, why not lean into that? After all, it was the Greens and Labor, with others on the crossbench, that banded together last parliament to lower the political donation disclosure threshold to $1,000, introduce industrial manslaughter laws and decriminalise begging. Surely working together could be about finding the middle space in the Venn diagram where no one compromises their values. Banning conversion therapy, working towards a treaty for First Nations peoples and strengthening the Integrity Commission are a few commonalities that spring to mind. If Labor gets the Greens on board, and with Craig Garland's vote, the party is only crossbenchers away from seizing power through a vote of no confidence. Of course, it may not come to that, but the backup plan is looking viable. And how wild would that be? Labor, which recorded its lowest ever primary vote, taking government and installing a premier that could not even pull a quota in his own right. If it pulls this off, Labor MPs will make up just over half of the 18 votes that they need in the lower house. What mandate do they really have? Then again, Tasmanians voted for 11 MPs that are neither Labor nor Liberal and the vast majority of those 11 MPs hold values that are far closer to Labor than the Liberals. Whether it can be called a progressive parliament is debatable. Winter's 'jobs jobs jobs' Labor is big on industries like mining, forestry and aquaculture and rarely delves into social issues. In fact, some have observed Mr Rockliff appears more socially progressive. But it certainly is not a Liberal friendly parliament either. They may have seen an uptick in their primary vote of more than three per cent and Mr Rockliff's 22,000 first preference votes, but their right-wing values do not appear to have won over the vast majority of Tasmanians. If the result was a true endorsement of the Liberals, wouldn't they have gained a single seat? In the end, all of this pondering does not matter, because both parties want government. One is trying to keep it, the other trying to claim it — and that means it is going to take a while. It is unclear exactly when Tasmanians will know who is going the lead the state. But while the parties play their power games, parliament is paused. No legislation is being passed, no big brave decisions (save Marinus) are being made — and the state is effectively left on standby.
